Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Atlwarrior wrote:Both New York and Atlanta have very large business minded African American populations. Delta also partners with Kenya Airways.
peanuts wrote:For a while DL planned to fly to NBO. I believe homeland security stopped it.
Other destinations they have tried and pulled back from. So experience wise, they got that.
UA just dabbled, based on the oil business.
peanuts wrote:Remember Ghanese or Nigerian authorities demanded DL once not to use inferior equipment on a certain route or the authorization would be pulled.
SCQ83 wrote:Africa is a very small market.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_t ... statistics
I don't know why even Canarias is there (?) but the fact that Gran Canaria and Tenerife would be Africa's 2nd and 3rd busiest airports only behind JNB is quite telling on how irrelevant air travel in Africa is in a global scale.
LAX772LR wrote:peanuts wrote:Remember Ghanese or Nigerian authorities demanded DL once not to use inferior equipment on a certain route or the authorization would be pulled.
That was actually S.Africa, and they demanded that DL not use aircraft beyond a certain age or flight hours (along with other restrictions) in their then scissor-hub operation into CPT and JNB.
So DL had to pull the 763ERs it was using, and use 764ERs instead. This became moot when the 77Ls entered and began the JNB nonstop.
dredgy wrote:The 2017 statistics look wrong, aside from the Spanish airports - which I’ll concede can be counted as African -, Addis Ababa is not on the list at all.
Using 2016 stats though, that doesn’t indicate a particularly small market. 32 airports with over 1 million passengers a year and substantial growth year to year in essentially all of them.
Of course that doesn’t mean there’s demand to the US, but Africa is a huge market that’s largely untapped.
Conducting business in Africa is also a right pain in the butt hole.
LAX772LR wrote:peanuts wrote:Remember Ghanese or Nigerian authorities demanded DL once not to use inferior equipment on a certain route or the authorization would be pulled.
That was actually S.Africa, and they demanded that DL not use aircraft beyond a certain age or flight hours (along with other restrictions) in their then scissor-hub operation into CPT and JNB.
So DL had to pull the 763ERs it was using, and use 764ERs instead. This became moot when the 77Ls entered and began the JNB nonstop.
SCQ83 wrote:Africa is a very small market.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_t ... statistics
I don't know why even Canarias is there (?) but the fact that Gran Canaria and Tenerife would be Africa's 2nd and 3rd busiest airports only behind JNB is quite telling on how irrelevant air travel in Africa is in a global scale.
waly777 wrote:LAX772LR wrote:peanuts wrote:Remember Ghanese or Nigerian authorities demanded DL once not to use inferior equipment on a certain route or the authorization would be pulled.
That was actually S.Africa, and they demanded that DL not use aircraft beyond a certain age or flight hours (along with other restrictions) in their then scissor-hub operation into CPT and JNB.
So DL had to pull the 763ERs it was using, and use 764ERs instead. This became moot when the 77Ls entered and began the JNB nonstop.
Actually it was LOS not JHB. I don't think the 767's have been to JHB. The primary problem DL faced on LOS at the time was underestimating just how much baggage Nigerian pax carried on average. As a result, the 767 regularly left bags and at a point had to be upgraded to the 77E to clear out the backlog of leftover bags.
BA received the same treatment at a point when 747 with the older brown/blue interior was rotated through LOS.
LAX772LR wrote:peanuts wrote:Remember Ghanese or Nigerian authorities demanded DL once not to use inferior equipment on a certain route or the authorization would be pulled.
That was actually S.Africa, and they demanded that DL not use aircraft beyond a certain age or flight hours (along with other restrictions) in their then scissor-hub operation into CPT and JNB.
So DL had to pull the 763ERs it was using, and use 764ERs instead. This became moot when the 77Ls entered and began the JNB nonstop.
peanuts wrote:
Africa flying requires a lot of patience and a delicate level of negotiations with the local authorities. It requires know how, which I believe KL/AF helped them with. Remember Ghanese or Nigerian authorities demanded DL once not to use inferior equipment on a certain route or the authorization would be pulled.
millionsofmiles wrote:waly777 wrote:LAX772LR wrote:That was actually S.Africa, and they demanded that DL not use aircraft beyond a certain age or flight hours (along with other restrictions) in their then scissor-hub operation into CPT and JNB.
So DL had to pull the 763ERs it was using, and use 764ERs instead. This became moot when the 77Ls entered and began the JNB nonstop.
Actually it was LOS not JHB. I don't think the 767's have been to JHB. The primary problem DL faced on LOS at the time was underestimating just how much baggage Nigerian pax carried on average. As a result, the 767 regularly left bags and at a point had to be upgraded to the 77E to clear out the backlog of leftover bags.
BA received the same treatment at a point when 747 with the older brown/blue interior was rotated through LOS.
Yes...it was LOS..
http://saharareporters.com/2015/07/13/n ... a-airlines’-old-planes
peanuts wrote:Now, JNB, is a whole different animal. That flight is packed with wealthy retired baby boomers going on safari on their trip of a lifetime. Very smart, DL.
slider wrote:millionsofmiles wrote:waly777 wrote:
Actually it was LOS not JHB. I don't think the 767's have been to JHB. The primary problem DL faced on LOS at the time was underestimating just how much baggage Nigerian pax carried on average. As a result, the 767 regularly left bags and at a point had to be upgraded to the 77E to clear out the backlog of leftover bags.
BA received the same treatment at a point when 747 with the older brown/blue interior was rotated through LOS.
Yes...it was LOS..
http://saharareporters.com/2015/07/13/n ... a-airlines’-old-planes
LOS bags are a nightmare. And unlike certain ethnic markets that pack heavy, LOS pax can be, um, difficult to resolve at check-in. Bu they pull out the fat stacks when they finally have to cough up excess baggage fees.
Manila bags are generally tough too, but the pax behavior is such that they'll weight their bags in advance and be JUST at the permissible limit (literally, 69.9 lbs, for instance). But I've seen LOS check-in counters and it's a disaster. Bulk outs are a real challenge, and since the route is thin anyhow, it's an added operational wrinkle.
As for North Africa, I think politically it's just a little hairy still for some destinations. Cairo tourism still hasn't rebounded yet, unfortunately. Everywhere else is too thin unless you're consolidating alliance codeshare traffic over a hub.
slider wrote:millionsofmiles wrote:waly777 wrote:
Actually it was LOS not JHB. I don't think the 767's have been to JHB. The primary problem DL faced on LOS at the time was underestimating just how much baggage Nigerian pax carried on average. As a result, the 767 regularly left bags and at a point had to be upgraded to the 77E to clear out the backlog of leftover bags.
BA received the same treatment at a point when 747 with the older brown/blue interior was rotated through LOS.
Yes...it was LOS..
http://saharareporters.com/2015/07/13/n ... a-airlines’-old-planes
LOS bags are a nightmare. And unlike certain ethnic markets that pack heavy, LOS pax can be, um, difficult to resolve at check-in. Bu they pull out the fat stacks when they finally have to cough up excess baggage fees.
Manila bags are generally tough too, but the pax behavior is such that they'll weight their bags in advance and be JUST at the permissible limit (literally, 69.9 lbs, for instance). But I've seen LOS check-in counters and it's a disaster. Bulk outs are a real challenge, and since the route is thin anyhow, it's an added operational wrinkle.
As for North Africa, I think politically it's just a little hairy still for some destinations. Cairo tourism still hasn't rebounded yet, unfortunately. Everywhere else is too thin unless you're consolidating alliance codeshare traffic over a hub.
readytotaxi wrote:slider wrote:millionsofmiles wrote:
LOS bags are a nightmare. And unlike certain ethnic markets that pack heavy, LOS pax can be, um, difficult to resolve at check-in. Bu they pull out the fat stacks when they finally have to cough up excess baggage fees.
Manila bags are generally tough too, but the pax behavior is such that they'll weight their bags in advance and be JUST at the permissible limit (literally, 69.9 lbs, for instance). But I've seen LOS check-in counters and it's a disaster. Bulk outs are a real challenge, and since the route is thin anyhow, it's an added operational wrinkle.
As for North Africa, I think politically it's just a little hairy still for some destinations. Cairo tourism still hasn't rebounded yet, unfortunately. Everywhere else is too thin unless you're consolidating alliance codeshare traffic over a hub.
Reminds me of the bad old times at LHR T3 in 1980's, the Friday night Nigeria airways DC10, check-in ways always a nightmare with local police on stand by. You could not believe what they wanted to take onboard as hand luggage.
Midwestindy wrote:Not to mention ATL-LOS has the highest one-way fares out of any flight in DL's network (probably around the same range as ATL-JNB though)
I imagine these flight milk money for DL
MIflyer12 wrote:Midwestindy wrote:Not to mention ATL-LOS has the highest one-way fares out of any flight in DL's network (probably around the same range as ATL-JNB though)
I imagine these flight milk money for DL
Are you speaking of average fares, including one fare component of an R/T?
NickolayAv wrote:Ever since UA ended its IAH-LOS route, DL has been the only US3 airline to operate flights to Africa. UA cited the poor financial performance on the flight as the reasoning for the closure, yet DL flies to a total of 4 destinations in Africa; Accra, Ghana; Lagos, Nigeria; Dakar, Senegal; Johannesburg, S. Africa.
What has allowed DL to operate flights to multiple destinations in Africa from both ATL and JFK (I'm assuming they're profitable judging by how long some of these flights have been operating), while UA has failed when they tried and I don't believe AA has ever flown to Africa (please correct me if I'm wrong)?
Please do not turn this thread into a US3 bashing thread, I'm not criticizing UA or AA for not operating into Africa, but am interested what has allowed DL to be successful in the market.
IAHWorldflyer wrote:UA's IAH-LOS route depended upon oil traffic to fill the J seats and VFR's to fill the Y seats. When it started, oil was over $100/bbl. In 2014 crude prices collasped to about $30-$40/bbl, and the business traffic died with it. The VFR traffic was still there, but not enough to pay the bills. Also, the route was flown with a 788,which was probably the right size for the loads and more fuel efficient. Then UA pulled all the 787's out of IAH, which would mean running the route with a 77E, probably too many seats to fill to make money.
As to AA, they have not been very adventurous in the past, with Latin America being their strong suit internationally. They really only started flying to Asia beyond Japan about 5 years ago with a change in management.
727200 wrote:Safety could also be an issue. I talked to DL crew members and there are stories of the crews met plane side by darkened window Van's and armed guards as escourt to hotels. Then the guards take up positions in halls and crews being told not to leave hotel. Scenario repeated for return.
I also heard UA unions wanted guarantees of crew safety and when couldnt be provided, they wanted out of Africa. Since flights were not big money winners, UA figured not worth it and pulled.
slider wrote:727200 wrote:Safety could also be an issue. I talked to DL crew members and there are stories of the crews met plane side by darkened window Van's and armed guards as escourt to hotels. Then the guards take up positions in halls and crews being told not to leave hotel. Scenario repeated for return.
I also heard UA unions wanted guarantees of crew safety and when couldnt be provided, they wanted out of Africa. Since flights were not big money winners, UA figured not worth it and pulled.
That's not true on UA. They had a solid hotel that had huge rooms, a rec room, drinks, laundry and dry cleaning and a lot of crews intentionally bid it because it was a productive trip and you just pocketed the intl per diem (because you didn't go outside). Safety was fine. But they--and all crews--have armed crew transportation escorts.
SAAFNAV wrote:LAX772LR wrote:peanuts wrote:Remember Ghanese or Nigerian authorities demanded DL once not to use inferior equipment on a certain route or the authorization would be pulled.
That was actually S.Africa, and they demanded that DL not use aircraft beyond a certain age or flight hours (along with other restrictions) in their then scissor-hub operation into CPT and JNB.
So DL had to pull the 763ERs it was using, and use 764ERs instead. This became moot when the 77Ls entered and began the JNB nonstop.
Have you got any documentation of that? Although I'm not disputing you outright, it does sound a bit funny. I'm not sure a country has the authority to ban another airline's planes based on hours, if the FAA still certifies that it's airworthy.
Some other airlines flies their 767's into JNB.
GSP psgr wrote:I feel like MIA-JNB should be a no brainer for AA:
-best geographic location/shortest stage length for JNB
-connections available to the rest of Southern Africa at JNB via Comair
-strong hub feed from key business destinations-LGA, DCA, LAX, etc
-relatively strong VFR component with a significant South African population in MIA
...and yet it's only stayed in the rumor stage for years.
CV880 wrote:What DL has in Africa and parts of Europe were PanAm routes just as UA got the Pacific/Asia routes. Many of the Scandinavian & Eastern European routes have been abandoned over the years as have some of the less lucrative African routes.
waly777 wrote:Lol if it can be carried onboard, we will take it. The ancillary revenue potential on Lagos is a goldmine for airlines who know how to manage it properly.
LAX772LR wrote:peanuts wrote:Remember Ghanese or Nigerian authorities demanded DL once not to use inferior equipment on a certain route or the authorization would be pulled.
That was actually S.Africa, and they demanded that DL not use aircraft beyond a certain age or flight hours (along with other restrictions) in their then scissor-hub operation into CPT and JNB.
So DL had to pull the 763ERs it was using, and use 764ERs instead. This became moot when the 77Ls entered and began the JNB nonstop.
intotheair wrote:From what I remember, the banking situation in Nigeria killed IAH-LOS for UA. They couldn't collect payment on the Nigeria point of sale, which made the flight untenable.
PMUA also tried IAD-ACC for a while, or was it IAD-LOS-ACC? I just remember it was a 763 with a tag, and it was tried right before the merger and then cut not too long after the merger.