I'd much rather fly one of the quality TPAC J products to TYO and ride the Shinkansen to Osaka than be stuck in an ancient DL 76W, a UA 788 with pmCO 2-2-2 seats or a regionally-configured JL 788.

This can be a financial issue but its also a strategic one with too few long haul beyond 767 or A330 airplanes. Delta does not have enough 777 or A350-900. Once the 744 were gone Delta did not have enough planes for flying to Hong Kong or distant Asia. If Delta's plan is to fly just to Japan, Korea and China fine but they are leaving important places behind, hello Singapore. Hong Kong should be flown from multiple gateways starting with Detroit and then MSP. LAX should be in long term plans.

Its sad to see no Delta in HKG and a shameful legacy to the Northwest Orient legacy which is only second to Pan Am's in USA airline history. History doesn't pay the bills but if Delta can't make money in HKG there is a problem at Delta not Hong Kong.

I still wonder why DL still flies the SEA-ICN route when KE flies the route as well. But I guess that's not any different with DL and AF flying the SEA-CDG route.

lydh wrote:

I'd much rather fly one of the quality TPAC J products to TYO and ride the Shinkansen to Osaka than be stuck in an ancient DL 76W, a UA 788 with pmCO 2-2-2 seats or a regionally-configured JL 788.

Be my guest. You're free to travel anyway you wish.

Actually the DL 767-300ERs have been refurbished with new interiors, as I understand it. Enjoy your train ride.

lydh wrote:

I'd much rather fly one of the quality TPAC J products to TYO and ride the Shinkansen to Osaka than be stuck in an ancient DL 76W, a UA 788 with pmCO 2-2-2 seats or a regionally-configured JL 788.

Have you ever done that? Getting off the plane in Tokyo and getting the Shinkansen to Osaka will take a lot more time. For sure a poor way to travel. I am no fan of DL, but I'd take nonstop any day.

incitatus wrote:

lydh wrote:

I'd much rather fly one of the quality TPAC J products to TYO and ride the Shinkansen to Osaka than be stuck in an ancient DL 76W, a UA 788 with pmCO 2-2-2 seats or a regionally-configured JL 788.

Have you ever done that? Getting off the plane in Tokyo and getting the Shinkansen to Osaka will take a lot more time. For sure a poor way to travel. I am no fan of DL, but I'd take nonstop any day.

Many times. Have you?

jfk777 wrote:

If Delta's plan is to fly just to Japan, Korea and China fine but they are leaving important places behind, hello Singapore. Hong Kong should be flown from multiple gateways starting with Detroit and then MSP. LAX should be in long term plans.

Its sad to see no Delta in HKG and a shameful legacy to the Northwest Orient legacy which is only second to Pan Am's in USA airline history. History doesn't pay the bills but if Delta can't make money in HKG there is a problem at Delta not Hong Kong.

Delta's Pacific strategy has been obvious for quite awhile and it's pretty much what you stated. Mostly flights to ICN (on KE instead of DL planes as much as possible), with connections on KE to China, Hong Kong, Singapore, etc., and a handful of nonstops to Japan. Yes this reduces Delta to being essentially a "virtual airline" to and from Asia but it offers code-share flights to much of Asia for North American frequent flyers who may not travel to Asia all that often, lets Delta stay a "global" airline, and limits their actual flying to and from Asia. The days of Northwest Orient are gone and they aren't coming back. With UA having a dominant position in the Pacific and UA/NH and AA/JL partnerships making DL a non-factor in Japan, it's the best they can do.

Alright folks,
It’s been a good work day.
Anyways, it’s time to discuss current events in the online aviation community.
I don’t see HKG returning in the long run, as DL was known to struggle with this route in the present.past. Either way, it is surprising. If DL is willing to try KIX, which is a niched market I’m curios as to what DL will try next. Can KIX really support daily service? Oh, and if they do try something new, expect to wait a few years.

I assumed DL still served HKG non stop out of DTW / MSP after reading this headline or some other US city


Or were those markets never served, what was the last city DL served HKG non stop from ?

Not shocked at all by the news, but it is definitely unfortunate. I have booked multiple $700 CVG-SEA-HKG RT tickets in the past few years. I figured they weren't making much money off of the flight.

cvgComair wrote:

Not shocked at all by the news, but it is definitely unfortunate. I have booked multiple $700 CVG-SEA-HKG RT tickets in the past few years. I figured they weren't making much money off of the flight.

Why would Delta even offer tickets at that price ?

BenflysDTW wrote:

Alright folks,
It’s been a good work day.
Anyways, it’s time to discuss current events in the online aviation community.
I don’t see HKG returning in the long run, as DL was known to struggle with this route in the present.past. Either way, it is surprising. If DL is willing to try KIX, which is a niched market I’m curios as to what DL will try next. Can KIX really support daily service? Oh, and if they do try something new, expect to wait a few years.

So the question is why can't Delta make it work. Who is driving the prices down in the market that Delta can't make it's yields.

MIflyer12 wrote:

MSPNWA wrote:

Had a chuckle about how they talk about being Seattle's "global" airline, and now that "global" airline won't be flying to HKG. Crazy to think DL metal won't be in HKG.

Is a flight to HKG what makes a carrier global or not?

No, but the DL critics will spin this that it's Sea hub is failing.

BoeingGuy wrote:

lydh wrote:

I'd much rather fly one of the quality TPAC J products to TYO and ride the Shinkansen to Osaka than be stuck in an ancient DL 76W, a UA 788 with pmCO 2-2-2 seats or a regionally-configured JL 788.

Be my guest. You're free to travel anyway you wish.

Actually the DL 767-300ERs have been refurbished with new interiors, as I understand it. Enjoy your train ride.

I rode the 767 to Frankfurt last month and I'd say I was pretty impressed with the leg room. Wasn't as tight as the 737 and 757 that I have been on.

EvanWSFO wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

MSPNWA wrote:

Had a chuckle about how they talk about being Seattle's "global" airline, and now that "global" airline won't be flying to HKG. Crazy to think DL metal won't be in HKG.

Is a flight to HKG what makes a carrier global or not?

No, but the DL critics will spin this that it's Sea hub is failing.

I think it is Delta is operating it's smallest aircraft there and only getting loads in the 80% range kind of bad really.

cvgComair wrote:

Not shocked at all by the news, but it is definitely unfortunate. I have booked multiple $700 CVG-SEA-HKG RT tickets in the past few years. I figured they weren't making much money off of the flight.

Now you can fly CVG-DTW-ICN-HKG

cvgComair wrote:

Not shocked at all by the news, but it is definitely unfortunate. I have booked multiple $700 CVG-SEA-HKG RT tickets in the past few years. I figured they weren't making much money off of the flight.

Assuming that is Y, what were the J prices on the route?

klm617 wrote:

cvgComair wrote:

Not shocked at all by the news, but it is definitely unfortunate. I have booked multiple $700 CVG-SEA-HKG RT tickets in the past few years. I figured they weren't making much money off of the flight.

Now you can fly CVG-DTW-ICN-HKG

Or starting next year, CVG-MSP-ICN-HKG...........

klm617 wrote:

EvanWSFO wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

Is a flight to HKG what makes a carrier global or not?

No, but the DL critics will spin this that it's Sea hub is failing.

I think it is Delta is operating it's smallest aircraft there and only getting loads in the 80% range kind of bad really.

Your comment has nothing to do with my reply to the question. DL does not have to fly everywhere. No airline does. HK is well served from enough cities that a SEA flight is not needed.

did DL continue flying NRT-HKG after the NW merger? for how long before going nonstop from SEA?

Lootess wrote:

zakuivcustom wrote:

I doubt PVG and PEK are going away. PVG has the giant MU feed, while PEK has the MU/CZ presence (although smaller than CA) and is also a much better geographic gateway to most of mainland China compare to HKG.

On the other hand, DL never seems to make HKG work, though. They stopped DTW-HKG in 2012, shifted that to NRT-HKG for awhile (I don't remembmer whether there was a gap somewhere in between, though), before ending that in favor of SEA TPAC expansion. DL also doesn't really have the name recognition that NW enjoyed for years (along with UA, of course, for its goods and bads).

Wrong. Delta still has a pretty big name recognition in Japan and Korea, plus a sizable elite base based at NRT. There are now 8 credit cards for Delta Japanese fliers, among other marketing efforts.

More like they can't get enough China routes.

I was referring to DL's name recognition in HKG, which is close to nothing.

flybynight wrote:

SEA, though, is a strong business market and one of the most rapidly growing large cities in North America. Air Canada seems to do well from Vancouver, which is a smaller city (of course there are very strong ties between Hong Kong and Van)

Except Metro Vancouver has 10x the Chinese population of greater Seattle. There's a reason why you don't see any of the CN3 (Only HU and MF) at SEA, but pretty much every single Chinese carrier that fly long-haul fly to YVR.

jfk777 wrote:

This can be a financial issue but its also a strategic one with too few long haul beyond 767 or A330 airplanes. Delta does not have enough 777 or A350-900. Once the 744 were gone Delta did not have enough planes for flying to Hong Kong or distant Asia. If Delta's plan is to fly just to Japan, Korea and China fine but they are leaving important places behind, hello Singapore. Hong Kong should be flown from multiple gateways starting with Detroit and then MSP. LAX should be in long term plans.

It's not like NW didn't try SEA-HKG, DTW-HKG, AND MSP-HKG, altogether, before. DTW-HKG was the only one that survived out of those 3.

As for LAX-HKG - it's already a bloodbath as-is. CX dominates the route, with AA only on that route b/c of CX. Then you got HX, which takes the rest of the bargain-bin traffic. There's a reason why UA calls it quit on the route.

TransWorldOne wrote:

DL exiting the HKG market is significant. It also speaks volumes as to what DL's TPAC strategy will be: route as much flying through ICN on KE metal to as many destinations as possible. As others have stated, KE labor costs are likely quite a bit lower so DL would rather outsource as much flying as they can. This will make them more money, of course. But if this keeps up, DL will soon become more of a virtual airline on the global front and the only people this will benefit will be the shareholders.

The entire purpose of JVs is to make airlines on either end, 1 airline. There is no winner flying a route if they are not making money. You said it yourself, DL will make more money, isn't that goal? It is a smart business decision. This 1 route, not even daily, that is not indicative of SEA failing, DL failing, this route does not make or break anything. There is a lot of competition in the airline business, so much capacity coming online. UA/AA are dedicating 787s to get the best economics. DL has never had a strong hub position in LAX/SFO, they are working with what they have. The idea that they have to fly a specific route is not rooted in reality. Delta is making hundreds of millions of dollars, they have to earn a certain amount of profit on a route to justify it, if they can put the plane on a different route (MSP-ICN) and make more money, that is the smart thing to do.

Like DL or not, this appears to be a smart business move.

lydh wrote:

incitatus wrote:

lydh wrote:

I'd much rather fly one of the quality TPAC J products to TYO and ride the Shinkansen to Osaka than be stuck in an ancient DL 76W, a UA 788 with pmCO 2-2-2 seats or a regionally-configured JL 788.

Have you ever done that? Getting off the plane in Tokyo and getting the Shinkansen to Osaka will take a lot more time. For sure a poor way to travel. I am no fan of DL, but I'd take nonstop any day.

Many times. Have you?

No I haven't. When I go to Osaka I land at KIX and hire a limo. It is much faster.

Always sad when a US carrier drops int'l service and Hongkong is a big int'l city to pull out of. Despite the rivalry between the US3, I feel it is never a win when one of them drops a major city from their flight map. But reading through this thread it seems like Y fares were trash and J fares hard to determine if good or bad. I know Delta has never had a huge presence in HKG so it makes sense to give that route to KE via ICN. Better for East Coast fliers anyway. And better for profitability. AA has also added more flights to HKG in recent years with a OneWorld partner on HKG end. So much has changed strategically in USA-Asia flying over the last decade. Makes sense.

klm617 wrote:

cvgComair wrote:

Not shocked at all by the news, but it is definitely unfortunate. I have booked multiple $700 CVG-SEA-HKG RT tickets in the past few years. I figured they weren't making much money off of the flight.

Now you can fly CVG-DTW-ICN-HKG

That is my plan! I can't wait to go through DTW on the A350, but it is probably not going to happen until later this year/early next year. However, fares will be much more expensive with that routing...

ADrum23 wrote:

Assuming that is Y, what were the J prices on the route?

I only book economy tickets, so I don't know what prices have been in J previously. Looking right now, the lowest prices I see from CVG are $800 Y and $3600 J.

This is utterly devastating that the world's second largest airline cannot sustain a flight to HKG. Go figure Delta is still flying NRT-SIN but can't manage a flight to HKG. Four years ago when Delta issued the RFP for 747 replacements, I thought the choice of the A350-900 was the right call. I don't think that anymore. They should have sucked it up with the 10 242 tonne A330-300s and the six 77Ls offered to immediately retire the 747 while the 18 788s inherited from NW could have been converted to 789s. A 789 could have kept SEA-HKG going. The A330-200 struggles too much for this flight in the winter. Remember when SEA-HKG went down to twice weekly in the winter? Weight restrictions big reason why. Hell if Delta had taken the 788s from NW, well the non-terrible teens ones which unfortunately they were slotted to receive several of them, SEA-HKG was a no brainer and would have done alright. Of course that's just one part of the equation.

The second is the incredibly weak HKG market penetration. UA is fortunate they have hubs in cities with strong HKG traffic in NYC, the Bay Area, and to a lesser extent ORD. I don't see Delta trying any JFK-Asia flying with the exception of maybe Delta and KE shifting metal around where Delta would operate a JFK-ICN frequency. Why would they operate JFK-HKG instead? Of course not. ATL is weak as well, in fact, the strongest ATL-Asia market is ICN and not even close. Delta is able to maintain ATL-NRT as the SE, when excluding IAD/IAH/DFW, has no other TYO flight. In fact, Delta is upgauging ATL-NRT to the A350-900 starting next March. I'm sceptical over whether ATL-PVG this time will work, even with the MU code-share. The times are not great for connections at PVG in either direction. DTW, on the other hand, works fine due to much larger market and better geography. So no chance of ATL-HKG. Could Delta return to DTW-HKG? I thought with the last ten A350-900s being taken as 280 tonnes, well that is if Delta does take the final ten which I have my doubts, Delta going back to DTW-HKG was a given. Now, not anymore. MSP-HKG is an even weaker market so no. The only place where I see Delta returning to HKG is LAX, even with the blood bath. Richard Anderson's idea for a SEA-Asia hub was the wrong call as while the market is getting larger, its nowhere near as big as LAX, even with the competition. Imagine if Delta had started LAX-HKG before AA did. While I get it Delta has no code-share on the HKG end, AA does not have a particularly strong relationship with CX. After the investment stake in CZ, AA's relationship with CX has cooled. Its rumoured that CX is considering ditching OW for SA. Yet AA has no problem with DFW-HKG, just take a look at the upgrade lists. CX actually dropped a daily flight from LAX soon after AA started LAX-HKG. With HX entering the market, there are now five daily flights between LAX and HKG. LAX-PVG also have five dailies. I believe LAX-HKG is actually the larger of the two markets. I have to think Delta has tried but failed to cozy up with HX.

It really is stunning could not HKG work at all. I wonder if there will be any push back from any corporate deals. JFK-NRT going away was one. Just fly NYC-MSP-HND and you're in downtown TYO, well almost. But no Delta metal to one of the world's premier financial centres, yet they are still flying to SIN, albeit via NRT? Sooner or later we'll find out what happens to NRT-SIN/MNL. Delta's hookup with NW with NRT-Asia flying without a JV partner until last month, and lack of a West Coast Pacific hub, well they had LAX but Ed's preference for LAX-Asia lost out to Anderson's SEA-Asia. I'll state this again, that NW should have merged with AA back in 2008 instead of DL as NRT was a OW hub. Delta should have merged with UA and fought tooth and nail for DOJ approval, which really shouldn't have been a problem. But I digress. This is a massive failure on Delta's Asia strategy over the past decade and to think that its possible that in a just few years Delta metal will only be flying to just TYO/NGO/KIX/ICN/PEK/PVG in East Asia is pathetic. The two reasons Delta-China isn't going anywhere, even with the excess capacity, is the JV doesn't cover China due to no open skies, and Delta still has that investment in MU. (I'd look for Delta to try to peel off AA's ORD-PEK when they suspend the route this fall and re-apply for LAX-PEK.)

As for SEA-KIX, it was dropped when the Yen plummeted in value. It was assumed that is was going to come back once the Japanese economy improved. The Japanese economy is a bit better now and the Yen is steady. SEA-OSA is a decent sized market. Delta started SEA-KIX with connections relying on AS. Now, Delta actually has connections to help feed this flight. Incidentally, I believe SEA has much more traffic headed to the Kansai region than HKG. Combined with the KE JV and the route just requiring one aircraft, this shouldn't be an issue. Delta was going to fly the A330 before they dropped the route. As SEA-HKG is dropped, Delta is all 767 to Asia and CDG, with the AMS flight being the sole A330 flight. Have to think the 767s are gone when the new IAF is opened and the A330neos arrive. Otherwise, Delta must really be having problems if the 767s stay in SEA even as they are retired and the thinking is once all the A330neos are delivered, the 767s would fly exclusively TATL until the 797 arrives. (Yes, it is happening.)

With all this being said, if you noticed the renderings of Delta's new LAX facility, there were an awful lot of A350-900s being featured. I wonder if Delta is going to not just add LAX-PEK, but will use their metal on LAX-ICN in DL-KE capacity adjustments, and maybe, just maybe, a return to HKG. I'll say it again, Delta should have gone all in on LAX right after the merger instead of the SEA experiment.

hiflyeras wrote:

KMCOFlyer wrote:

All of this is coming on the heels of the upcoming pilot contract negotiations. The pilots are not happy about all of the long-haul International flying that has been shipped away to JV partners instead of being flown by DL metal. If this gets in the way of the contract negotiations, I wonder if HKG and other destinations that now mainly rely on JV partners could return or be added in the future on DL metal.

Or just the opposite? Farm out even more routes to your JV partners as a show of who's the boss?

Then kill the moral and goodwill of your "team" minded workforce. Before you know it pilots are informationally picketing and your flight attendants unionize to counter the outsourcing of their careers. That'd be penny wise, pound foolish.
Or instead of outsourcing to the maximum extent possible, agree to a fair and equitable split of JV flying be done by your own home country workgroup.

DeSpringbokke wrote:

This is utterly devastating that the world's second largest airline cannot sustain a flight to HKG. Go figure Delta is still flying NRT-SIN but can't manage a flight to HKG. Four years ago when Delta issued the RFP for 747 replacements, I thought the choice of the A350-900 was the right call. I don't think that anymore. They should have sucked it up with the 10 242 tonne A330-300s and the six 77Ls offered to immediately retire the 747 while the 18 788s inherited from NW could have been converted to 789s. A 789 could have kept SEA-HKG going. The A330-200 struggles too much for this flight in the winter. Remember when SEA-HKG went down to twice weekly in the winter? Weight restrictions big reason why. Hell if Delta had taken the 788s from NW, well the non-terrible teens ones which unfortunately they were slotted to receive several of them, SEA-HKG was a no brainer and would have done alright. Of course that's just one part of the equation.

The second is the incredibly weak HKG market penetration. UA is fortunate they have hubs in cities with strong HKG traffic in NYC, the Bay Area, and to a lesser extent ORD. I don't see Delta trying any JFK-Asia flying with the exception of maybe Delta and KE shifting metal around where Delta would operate a JFK-ICN frequency. Why would they operate JFK-HKG instead? Of course not. ATL is weak as well, in fact, the strongest ATL-Asia market is ICN and not even close. Delta is able to maintain ATL-NRT as the SE, when excluding IAD/IAH/DFW, has no other TYO flight. In fact, Delta is upgauging ATL-NRT to the A350-900 starting next March. I'm sceptical over whether ATL-PVG this time will work, even with the MU code-share. The times are not great for connections at PVG in either direction. DTW, on the other hand, works fine due to much larger market and better geography. So no chance of ATL-HKG. Could Delta return to DTW-HKG? I thought with the last ten A350-900s being taken as 280 tonnes, well that is if Delta does take the final ten which I have my doubts, Delta going back to DTW-HKG was a given. Now, not anymore. MSP-HKG is an even weaker market so no. The only place where I see Delta returning to HKG is LAX, even with the blood bath. Richard Anderson's idea for a SEA-Asia hub was the wrong call as while the market is getting larger, its nowhere near as big as LAX, even with the competition. Imagine if Delta had started LAX-HKG before AA did. While I get it Delta has no code-share on the HKG end, AA does not have a particularly strong relationship with CX. After the investment stake in CZ, AA's relationship with CX has cooled. Its rumoured that CX is considering ditching OW for SA. Yet AA has no problem with DFW-HKG, just take a look at the upgrade lists. CX actually dropped a daily flight from LAX soon after AA started LAX-HKG. With HX entering the market, there are now five daily flights between LAX and HKG. LAX-PVG also have five dailies. I believe LAX-HKG is actually the larger of the two markets. I have to think Delta has tried but failed to cozy up with HX.

It really is stunning could not HKG work at all. I wonder if there will be any push back from any corporate deals. JFK-NRT going away was one. Just fly NYC-MSP-HND and you're in downtown TYO, well almost. But no Delta metal to one of the world's premier financial centres, yet they are still flying to SIN, albeit via NRT? Sooner or later we'll find out what happens to NRT-SIN/MNL. Delta's hookup with NW with NRT-Asia flying without a JV partner until last month, and lack of a West Coast Pacific hub, well they had LAX but Ed's preference for LAX-Asia lost out to Anderson's SEA-Asia. I'll state this again, that NW should have merged with AA back in 2008 instead of DL as NRT was a OW hub. Delta should have merged with UA and fought tooth and nail for DOJ approval, which really shouldn't have been a problem. But I digress. This is a massive failure on Delta's Asia strategy over the past decade and to think that its possible that in a just few years Delta metal will only be flying to just TYO/NGO/KIX/ICN/PEK/PVG in East Asia is pathetic. The two reasons Delta-China isn't going anywhere, even with the excess capacity, is the JV doesn't cover China due to no open skies, and Delta still has that investment in MU. (I'd look for Delta to try to peel off AA's ORD-PEK when they suspend the route this fall and re-apply for LAX-PEK.)

As for SEA-KIX, it was dropped when the Yen plummeted in value. It was assumed that is was going to come back once the Japanese economy improved. The Japanese economy is a bit better now and the Yen is steady. SEA-OSA is a decent sized market. Delta started SEA-KIX with connections relying on AS. Now, Delta actually has connections to help feed this flight. Incidentally, I believe SEA has much more traffic headed to the Kansai region than HKG. Combined with the KE JV and the route just requiring one aircraft, this shouldn't be an issue. Delta was going to fly the A330 before they dropped the route. As SEA-HKG is dropped, Delta is all 767 to Asia and CDG, with the AMS flight being the sole A330 flight. Have to think the 767s are gone when the new IAF is opened and the A330neos arrive. Otherwise, Delta must really be having problems if the 767s stay in SEA even as they are retired and the thinking is once all the A330neos are delivered, the 767s would fly exclusively TATL until the 797 arrives. (Yes, it is happening.)

With all this being said, if you noticed the renderings of Delta's new LAX facility, there were an awful lot of A350-900s being featured. I wonder if Delta is going to not just add LAX-PEK, but will use their metal on LAX-ICN in DL-KE capacity adjustments, and maybe, just maybe, a return to HKG. I'll say it again, Delta should have gone all in on LAX right after the merger instead of the SEA experiment.

It wouldn't surprise me if DL scaled back their "hub" at SEA for LAX once their proposed LAX facility expansion is completed. This especially could happen when the industry/economy starts a downturn. DL's 767-300ER's are getting old and need to be replaced probably sooner rather than later. Once they start falling off for A350's, SEA will no longer be needed for TPAC services.

It should be noted that even though it's to KIX, this is being operated within the DL/KE joint venture. https://news.delta.com/delta-add-seattl ... n-air-2019

Agree DL should have kept the 788 order. This would have provided more route flexibility and replacements for 763’s.

DL is too weak in TPAC to have a two hub set up (LAX and SEA) like on the east coast (ATL and JFK). I think SEA will become a focus city, similar to BOS, providing feed to KE and LAX will be DL’s west coast TPAC gateway hub... err, Sky Way.

bostonvancouver wrote:

did DL continue flying NRT-HKG after the NW merger? for how long before going nonstop from SEA?

NW also flew SEA-HKG.

Reason starting KIX again is that the airport is offering generous subsidy/charges to new route.(even if it existed before)

Without these incentives I doubt DL would even consider resuming this route.

http://www.kansai-airports.co.jp/news/2 ... youkin.pdf

Link provided. (Sorry Jap only)

BenflysDTW wrote:

Source:

https://news.delta.com/delta-add-seattl ... n-air-2019

Service begins with no official date in 2019 on board a 767-300ER.

Hong Kong will be cut and will be served by KE at ICN hub instead.

Delta inherited a network from Northwest. I can see the 747 cost being a drag but to cut all of those flights seems like they are throwing in the towel in Asia.

Doesn't seem that Delta is doing very well in HKG since day 1. Never ever. Even AA and UA do better than DL.

Was on HKG-SEA-HKG and YVR-SEA on DL earlier and the flight/service/food/drinks=superb. HKG-SEA-HKG was all full but again full flights are not necessarily profitable flights.

Pretty sad. Will they start another HKG route to replace it? Maybe HKG-LAX-HKG or HKG-JFK-HKG? Will Hong Kong-Atlanta work? They were very interested in the early 2000s.

Hong Kong economy fares have been trash for a while. Advanced purchase tickets from the US to HKG can be $500 or less round trip. All the Chinese airlines adding flights have killed yields to HKG as well as Southeast Asia. I can see why it isn’t profitable but still quite a shock to give up. UA has 3 widebodies a day flying to HKG.

zakuivcustom wrote:

BoeingGuy wrote:

Should be time for CX to start SEA then.

Maybe. CX and AS do have codesharing partnership, so it does make some sense. Would also fit into CX's recent route expansion into more "secondary" market (i.e. BRU/CPH/DUB along with IAD) to increase its global reach and explore new markets, with existing markets getting more cutthroat in terms of yield lately.

BoeingGuy wrote:

My girlfriend's company has an office in HKG. She said DL's business class on the HKG flight was much more expensive than CX through YVR so most people take CX. Now it's a moot point.

I'm actually a little bit surprised about this. DL's economy fare on SEA-HKG has always been fairly low (USD400-500 RT are the norm), and it almost seems like it's always on sale, also (at least ex-HKG).

Would The fares have been lower out of LAX? Is SEA not working like DL thinks or is it just sign of the times and better sense to use a partner?

incitatus wrote:

lydh wrote:

incitatus wrote:

Have you ever done that? Getting off the plane in Tokyo and getting the Shinkansen to Osaka will take a lot more time. For sure a poor way to travel. I am no fan of DL, but I'd take nonstop any day.

Many times. Have you?

No I haven't. When I go to Osaka I land at KIX and hire a limo. It is much faster.

But the Haruka from KIX is even faster. No worry of traffic jams.
https://www.westjr.co.jp/global/en/trav ... train.html

Ryanair01 wrote:

It does make you wonder about the SEA hub. Such a shame to watch DL destroy the NW legacy in Asia,

There not destroying it they have imop tried to hold out but the world and industry has changed. We don't have To fly 747's only for direct long distance flights. Hubs are no longer needed since we have smaller aircraft that can overfly hubs. Travel patterns change. The size of DL today is So much different then NW and the need to do things the way they use to are not sustainable.

IF anything I think DL has held on to the NW legacy to long. I get the sentiment I miss the old days a lot.

grbauc wrote:

zakuivcustom wrote:

BoeingGuy wrote:

Should be time for CX to start SEA then.

Maybe. CX and AS do have codesharing partnership, so it does make some sense. Would also fit into CX's recent route expansion into more "secondary" market (i.e. BRU/CPH/DUB along with IAD) to increase its global reach and explore new markets, with existing markets getting more cutthroat in terms of yield lately.

BoeingGuy wrote:

My girlfriend's company has an office in HKG. She said DL's business class on the HKG flight was much more expensive than CX through YVR so most people take CX. Now it's a moot point.

I'm actually a little bit surprised about this. DL's economy fare on SEA-HKG has always been fairly low (USD400-500 RT are the norm), and it almost seems like it's always on sale, also (at least ex-HKG).

Would The fares have been lower out of LAX? Is SEA not working like DL thinks or is it just sign of the times and better sense to use a partner?

DL joining LAX-HKG would be a bloodbath. Currently 5x a day with AA, CX, and HX.

WPvsMW wrote:

incitatus wrote:

lydh wrote:

Many times. Have you?

No I haven't. When I go to Osaka I land at KIX and hire a limo. It is much faster.

But the Haruka from KIX is even faster. No worry of traffic jams.
https://www.westjr.co.jp/global/en/trav ... train.html

Actually Nankai is the better choice of getting into Osaka CBD. (Other than Tenoji)

Problem for Haruka is that after it departs from Tenoji station it has to use Osaka circular line to reach to Shin-Osaka station and it’s taking longer route.

Also strictly speaking Shin Osaka is not really inside Osaka CBD and you need to make a turn in order to go to Umeda area . (Haruka can’t stop at Osaka station due to track alignment)

Way off the topic....what DL really should have done is to keep SEA-HND and codeshare flight with Japanese carriers so they can send passengers to other cities in Japan. (Code sharing part very hard I know)

Use Osaka as an example, transiting at HND allow you to arrive at ITM instead of KIX in Osaka. It’s easy,quick and convenient.

questions wrote:

Agree DL should have kept the 788 order. This would have provided more route flexibility and replacements for 763’s.

DL is too weak in TPAC to have a two hub set up (LAX and SEA) like on the east coast (ATL and JFK). I think SEA will become a focus city, similar to BOS, providing feed to KE and LAX will be DL’s west coast TPAC gateway hub... err, Sky Way.

MIflyer12 wrote:

MSPNWA wrote:

Had a chuckle about how they talk about being Seattle's "global" airline, and now that "global" airline won't be flying to HKG. Crazy to think DL metal won't be in HKG.

Is a flight to HKG what makes a carrier global or not?

Well, if you go to Hong Kong, you’ll see sign after sign claiming it’s “Asia’s Global City”.

seabosdca wrote:

The 77E is too much aircraft, and the 332 was at the ragged edge of its range and presented operational challenges. Maybe they'll try again when the full A350 fleet has been delivered.

One of those 788s they canceled would have been really handy for this route.

The 788 would have been great for routes like SEA-HKG/MSP-ICN and maybe a couple others, but DL instead opted with what seems like an orphan aircraft in the A330neo. I think ordering the A350 was a good choice, but I don't understand why DL would opt for the A330neo over the 788. If DL had 788s, we wouldn't even be having discussions of can MSP handle 2 TPAC flights. Such a big mistake IMO. Hopefully down the road when DL needs to replace more 767s, DL may consider the 787, but at this point I doubt it would be the 787-8 or -9.

US3 have a high cost structure, which inside fortress USA, nevertheless results in high profits. Outside the USA, it creates a profitability threshold rarely achieved in the rest of the World, so difficult to justify nurturing low profit international routes (by US standards) versus domestic investment.

wedgetail737 wrote:

I still wonder why DL still flies the SEA-ICN route when KE flies the route as well. But I guess that's not any different with DL and AF flying the SEA-CDG route.

....

Why does DL fly ATL-ICN late night, when KE flies the same route earlier in the afternoon?

It's a joint-venture, it's the same as having the same route 2x/day.

a19901213 wrote:

WPvsMW wrote:

incitatus wrote:

No I haven't. When I go to Osaka I land at KIX and hire a limo. It is much faster.

But the Haruka from KIX is even faster. No worry of traffic jams.
https://www.westjr.co.jp/global/en/trav ... train.html

Actually Nankai is the better choice of getting into Osaka CBD. (Other than Tenoji).

True, re: Nankai if your terminus is Osaka CBD. Most of the time, I either norikae at Shin Osaka or go to Kyoto eki; Haruka is better for those.

Back on topic, since DL is rolling the dice on KIX (again)... why not pioneer a new route... SEA/HIJ (Hiroshima). Be a big fish in a small pond, with low landing fees... or waived landing fees. HIJ management needs to incentivize to attract a US3 carrier.

ual763 wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

MSPNWA wrote:

Had a chuckle about how they talk about being Seattle's "global" airline, and now that "global" airline won't be flying to HKG. Crazy to think DL metal won't be in HKG.

Is a flight to HKG what makes a carrier global or not?

Well, if you go to Hong Kong, you’ll see sign after sign claiming it’s “Asia’s Global City”.

considering HKG has the highest % of premium passengers and is a mega transit point for passengers and cargo, it is shocking that DL can't sustain flights.

WPvsMW wrote:

a19901213 wrote:

WPvsMW wrote:

But the Haruka from KIX is even faster. No worry of traffic jams.
https://www.westjr.co.jp/global/en/trav ... train.html

Actually Nankai is the better choice of getting into Osaka CBD. (Other than Tenoji).

True, re: Nankai if your terminus is Osaka CBD. Most of the time, I either norikae at Shin Osaka or go to Kyoto eki; Haruka is better for those.

Back on topic, since DL is rolling the dice on KIX (again)... why not pioneer a new route... SEA/HIJ (Hiroshima). Be a big fish in a small pond, with low landing fees... or waived landing fees. HIJ management needs to incentivize to attract a US3 carrier.

HIJ can't even support a flight to HNL as-is. Further into US is a pipe dream. Plus you got NGO and FUK at least ahead of HIJ. For that matter, HIJ barely has flights to international regional destination (i.e. HKG, TPE, ICN, PVG).

United Airline wrote:

Doesn't seem that Delta is doing very well in HKG since day 1. Never ever. Even AA and UA do better than DL.

Was on HKG-SEA-HKG and YVR-SEA on DL earlier and the flight/service/food/drinks=superb. HKG-SEA-HKG was all full but again full flights are not necessarily profitable flights.

Pretty sad. Will they start another HKG route to replace it? Maybe HKG-LAX-HKG or HKG-JFK-HKG? Will Hong Kong-Atlanta work? They were very interested in the early 2000s.

If DL can't make SEA work, ATL would be worse. It is a very long flight with even less O&D traffic.

As for JFK - DL didn't even bother duking it out on the TYO flight, making HKG less likely to happen for DL.