Delta's striking as the only one of the US3 not to run a daylight flight to LHR from one of their big trunk hubs as AA (ORD) and UA (IAD & EWR) do. This got me wondering if Delta has ever run such a flight from the most powerful hub in North America? Such a flight would open up a lot of 1 stop markets, particularly in the in the South, that do not currently enjoy access to an LHR daylight flight. The timings could clearly work: something like:

DLXXX ATL-LHR 0930 2230 763
DLXXX LHR-ATL 0730 1230 763

Then again, the last such additional daylight flight, AA's PHL-LHR daylight with a 757 was a complete and utter flop. Despite being the big gorilla at ORD, UA has declined trying to compete with AA on a daylight ORD-LHR service (although it started one just before 9/11, which was quickly axed). Also, a daylight LHR is a service that might make more sense as a DTW flight given that it could utilize a 752 instead of a 763 from ATL.

They have not ever run a daylight flight from ATL-LHR.

I have used AA's 9am out of ORD-LHR but connected inward from MCI which departed 610am ,so I had to get up at 3am, so it really put me in same "jet lag" condition as overnight flight.

There is enough feed for an 830am departure ATL-LHR. I think it would be a good option. There are a number of people who do not like red eye flights or rushing to the airport after work.

Regarding comparisons to ORD, Chicago has more demand to London than Atlanta (1.1M vs 650K). That helps sustain demand since the daytime flights are heavily based on O/D.

Miami may be more likely to get a daytime flight than Atlanta since Miami to London demand is almost 1M passengers per year. Although visas are an issue, there is a lot of feed for an 8am MIA-LHR flight from Latin America

I would have though most pax would transit MAD rather than MIA from Latin America to LHR, given the US immigration hassles and long queues at MIA. Perhaps a daylight FLL - LGW could work, with timings like 1020 / 2345, ideal for those early morning cruise ship arrivals.
If LHR allowed arrivals after 2300, then I agree a daylight ATL - LHR could work too.

Newbiepilot wrote:

There is enough feed for an 830am departure ATL-LHR. I think it would be a good option. There are a number of people who do not like red eye flights or rushing to the airport after work.

Regarding comparisons to ORD, Chicago has more demand to London than Atlanta (1.1M vs 650K). That helps sustain demand since the daytime flights are heavily based on O/D.

Miami may be more likely to get a daytime flight than Atlanta since Miami to London demand is almost 1M passengers per year. Although visas are an issue, there is a lot of feed for an 8am MIA-LHR flight from Latin America

Those numbers represent both local and connecting traffic. Daytime flights only really work on routes with large amounts of local premium traffic hence New York, Boston, DC and Chicago. Miami would fit the bill in that regard but it's probably too long of a flight to be viable as a daylight flight(undesirably early departure or late arrival). Atlanta and Philadelphia aren't quite in the same league.

Newbiepilot wrote:

There is enough feed for an 830am departure ATL-LHR. I think it would be a good option. There are a number of people who do not like red eye flights or rushing to the airport after work.

Regarding comparisons to ORD, Chicago has more demand to London than Atlanta (1.1M vs 650K). That helps sustain demand since the daytime flights are heavily based on O/D.

Miami may be more likely to get a daytime flight than Atlanta since Miami to London demand is almost 1M passengers per year. Although visas are an issue, there is a lot of feed for an 8am MIA-LHR flight from Latin America

Is there? That flight would arrive into London at 10 or 11pm, so no onward connections would be possible. And London is not a huge destination in Europe from Latin America, especially as the UK (and Ireland) demands that passport holders from several Latin American countries get a visa, unlike the Schengen countries.

MalevTU134 wrote:

Newbiepilot wrote:

There is enough feed for an 830am departure ATL-LHR. I think it would be a good option. There are a number of people who do not like red eye flights or rushing to the airport after work.

Regarding comparisons to ORD, Chicago has more demand to London than Atlanta (1.1M vs 650K). That helps sustain demand since the daytime flights are heavily based on O/D.

Miami may be more likely to get a daytime flight than Atlanta since Miami to London demand is almost 1M passengers per year. Although visas are an issue, there is a lot of feed for an 8am MIA-LHR flight from Latin America

Is there? That flight would arrive into London at 10 or 11pm, so no onward connections would be possible. And London is not a huge destination in Europe from Latin America, especially as the UK (and Ireland) demands that passport holders from several Latin American countries get a visa, unlike the Schengen countries.

London doesn’t have a whole lot of nonstop flights to Latin America. Perhaps I exaggerated. Traffic goes through Madrid, Lisbon, and other cities including New York and Miami. Perhaps it isn’t a lot, but there is probably some feed available through either ATL or MIA. Both ATL and MIA have a number of inbound red eye flights. Visas and immigration can be a deterrent for transiting the US, but many high yielding passengers going to the UK also have US visas or are outbound from London.

Newbiepilot wrote:

MalevTU134 wrote:

Newbiepilot wrote:

There is enough feed for an 830am departure ATL-LHR. I think it would be a good option. There are a number of people who do not like red eye flights or rushing to the airport after work.

Regarding comparisons to ORD, Chicago has more demand to London than Atlanta (1.1M vs 650K). That helps sustain demand since the daytime flights are heavily based on O/D.

Miami may be more likely to get a daytime flight than Atlanta since Miami to London demand is almost 1M passengers per year. Although visas are an issue, there is a lot of feed for an 8am MIA-LHR flight from Latin America

Is there? That flight would arrive into London at 10 or 11pm, so no onward connections would be possible. And London is not a huge destination in Europe from Latin America, especially as the UK (and Ireland) demands that passport holders from several Latin American countries get a visa, unlike the Schengen countries.

London doesn’t have a whole lot of nonstop flights to Latin America. Perhaps I exaggerated. Traffic goes through Madrid, Lisbon, and other cities including New York and Miami. Perhaps it isn’t a lot, but there is probably some feed available through either ATL or MIA. Both ATL and MIA have a number of inbound red eye flights. Visas and immigration can be a deterrent for transiting the US, but many high yielding passengers going to the UK also have US visas or are outbound from London.

I understand...but it is those very customers (the high yielding ones) that will not go through MIA, but rather on a nonstop. Maybe I miss some, but at least BUE, SAO and BOG has nonstop flights to LHR.

bagoldex wrote:

Newbiepilot wrote:

There is enough feed for an 830am departure ATL-LHR. I think it would be a good option. There are a number of people who do not like red eye flights or rushing to the airport after work.

Regarding comparisons to ORD, Chicago has more demand to London than Atlanta (1.1M vs 650K). That helps sustain demand since the daytime flights are heavily based on O/D.

Miami may be more likely to get a daytime flight than Atlanta since Miami to London demand is almost 1M passengers per year. Although visas are an issue, there is a lot of feed for an 8am MIA-LHR flight from Latin America

Those numbers represent both local and connecting traffic. Daytime flights only really work on routes with large amounts of local premium traffic hence New York, Boston, DC and Chicago. Miami would fit the bill in that regard but it's probably too long of a flight to be viable as a daylight flight(undesirably early departure or late arrival). Atlanta and Philadelphia aren't quite in the same league.

While I agree that ATL isn't in the same league as a BOS, WAS, or ORD in terms of LHR demand, in the case of a daylight ATL-LHR, it's somewhat compensated for in that it would fulfill a network need for Delta-providing an option for a daylight service from a trunk hub. It's similar to PMUA's IAD-LHR in that regard. Without connections, I would tend to think at best it was a marginal route. But as the UA network's option for a daylight LHR, it worked.

knope2001 wrote:

RJNUT wrote:

They have not ever run a daylight flight from ATL-LHR.

I have used AA's 9am out of ORD-LHR but connected inward from MCI which departed 610am ,so I had to get up at 3am, so it really put me in same "jet lag" condition as overnight flight.

Interesting -- to me the daylight was perfect since although I did have a long travel day it was bed time when we got to London. Woke up the next day with no jet lag at all. Perhaps a YMMV situation...

If I had originated ORD I would have had better outcome I believe!

GSP psgr wrote:

Delta's striking as the only one of the US3 not to run a daylight flight to LHR from one of their big trunk hubs as AA (ORD) and UA (IAD & EWR) do. This got me wondering if Delta has ever run such a flight from the most powerful hub in North America? Such a flight would open up a lot of 1 stop markets, particularly in the in the South, that do not currently enjoy access to an LHR daylight flight. The timings could clearly work: something like:

DLXXX ATL-LHR 0930 2230 763
DLXXX LHR-ATL 0730 1230 763

Then again, the last such additional daylight flight, AA's PHL-LHR daylight with a 757 was a complete and utter flop. Despite being the big gorilla at ORD, UA has declined trying to compete with AA on a daylight ORD-LHR service (although it started one just before 9/11, which was quickly axed). Also, a daylight LHR is a service that might make more sense as a DTW flight given that it could utilize a 752 instead of a 763 from ATL.

The return flight from LHR would depart at 1900. Allowing for a full day of work in London. AA’s LHR-ORD allowed for the lastest possible departure from many European capitals, even with a connection in LHR. ATL just doesn’t have a lot of premium business traffic to UK.

People here need to ask themselves why an airline does X,Y&Z rather than ask why another airline doesn’t do the same without understanding why it is done in the first place.

RJNUT wrote:

They have not ever run a daylight flight from ATL-LHR.

I have used AA's 9am out of ORD-LHR but connected inward from MCI which departed 610am ,so I had to get up at 3am, so it really put me in same "jet lag" condition as overnight flight.

I do the 9am ORD-LHR frequently, also coming out of MCI, and find it much better. I usually just stay at the Sofitel T5 that night, have a few drinks at the bar, and sleep in a bit the next morning and am perfectly set. I now avoid the overnight flight whenever possible.

GSP psgr wrote:

bagoldex wrote:

Newbiepilot wrote:

There is enough feed for an 830am departure ATL-LHR. I think it would be a good option. There are a number of people who do not like red eye flights or rushing to the airport after work.

Regarding comparisons to ORD, Chicago has more demand to London than Atlanta (1.1M vs 650K). That helps sustain demand since the daytime flights are heavily based on O/D.

Miami may be more likely to get a daytime flight than Atlanta since Miami to London demand is almost 1M passengers per year. Although visas are an issue, there is a lot of feed for an 8am MIA-LHR flight from Latin America

Those numbers represent both local and connecting traffic. Daytime flights only really work on routes with large amounts of local premium traffic hence New York, Boston, DC and Chicago. Miami would fit the bill in that regard but it's probably too long of a flight to be viable as a daylight flight(undesirably early departure or late arrival). Atlanta and Philadelphia aren't quite in the same league.

While I agree that ATL isn't in the same league as a BOS, WAS, or ORD in terms of LHR demand, in the case of a daylight ATL-LHR, it's somewhat compensated for in that it would fulfill a network need for Delta-providing an option for a daylight service from a trunk hub. It's similar to PMUA's IAD-LHR in that regard. Without connections, I would tend to think at best it was a marginal route. But as the UA network's option for a daylight LHR, it worked.

While not Delta, Virgin Atlantic has an 8am JFK-LHR. That flight is pretty useless for feed or the overall delta network, but it exists. Although a smaller hub than ATL, Washington DC is 7th among US destinations from LHR and a bigger market than ATL. ATL is number 10, just behind Dallas.

And that 8am JFK-LHR on a VS A346 does well. There are many pax connecting from that flight to VS’ LHR-LOS and LHR-DEL flights as they both depart late evening. DL can at least share in the revenue on the JFK-LHR portion of those connecting itineraries.

I can’t imagine too many high yield passengers will use ANY US hub to connect to Europe for no other reason than time. Regardless of the connection several hours of flying time will he added. All of the major Latin American cities have nonstop access to at least one European hub.

The issue is, if there are curfew, airlines will have to dump their planes overnight. That reason is strong enough to keep that from happening without sufficient demand.
For ATL, without a curfew, they could set off at 0050 and arrive at 0530, which sounds like an ideal setting for airlines to avoid time waste, as well as passengers who want to exploit the advantage of cheap morning domestic flights of United States.
The nature of the issue comes from the limit of LHR, not (at least, in the case of ATL) its O&D passengers.

The VS daylight really does it for DL for JFK, but ATL different story. Would be an interesting route, may just work. I have done YYZ-LHR as a daylight and liked it ->> And took that route because Delta could not get me there as a daylight!

When a flight arrives late at LHR, the return will have to be the next day. Example: UA122 from IAD arrives at 2030 and UA123 departs at 0730 next day. But morning departure slots are likely to be hard to get hold of, so this issue would need to be addressed.

There's certainly feed from SE markets xxx-ATL with a 40-minute MCT domestic to int'l. What's the O&D demand ATL-LHR, and how would a daylight flight gain or lose premium cabin demand?

Maybe this is an add for DL to try if it needs to build 767 hours to maintain JV balance.

Atlanta won't be able to support a day flight to London. The flight is too long, not enough O&D and not enough transfer traffic at either end. The only other city in North America that could possibly have a day flight to London is Philadelphia with late evening departure by BA from London and morning return similar to BA239/BA238 or BA183/BA178.

I’ve been on the BA239 (ATC calls it 29Golf) from Boston to London three times...twice on a 777 and once on a 789. None of the flights were full (admittedly in the winter all three times) and I don’t know how 238/239 typically does for loads. But it’s been a BOS mainstay for many years so it must do well enough. I’ve never been on 238, though.

Tristar787 wrote:

And that 8am JFK-LHR on a VS A346 does well. There are many pax connecting from that flight to VS’ LHR-LOS and LHR-DEL flights as they both depart late evening. DL can at least share in the revenue on the JFK-LHR portion of those connecting itineraries.

Yeah this flight is actually pretty useful for Delta's network. All of the redeyes from the west coast can connect at JFK for the continuation towards London and the rest of Europe. Morning flights can work if you get slots and have an adequate amount of connecting passengers.

shaneam12 wrote:

Tristar787 wrote:

And that 8am JFK-LHR on a VS A346 does well. There are many pax connecting from that flight to VS’ LHR-LOS and LHR-DEL flights as they both depart late evening. DL can at least share in the revenue on the JFK-LHR portion of those connecting itineraries.

Yeah this flight is actually pretty useful for Delta's network. All of the redeyes from the west coast can connect at JFK for the continuation towards London and the rest of Europe. Morning flights can work if you get slots and have an adequate amount of connecting passengers.

That doesn't make any sense. Why would someone from the U.S. West Coast take a red-eye to JFK then change planes and take a daylight flight to LHR (then potentially transfer to a third flight to somewhere in continental Europe)? They have wasted an entire travel day. Why wouldn't they just take a mid-afternoon nonstop from the West Coast to LHR and arrive the next morning?

lhrsfosyd wrote:

Atlanta won't be able to support a day flight to London. The flight is too long, not enough O&D and not enough transfer traffic at either end. The only other city in North America that could possibly have a day flight to London is Philadelphia with late evening departure by BA from London and morning return similar to BA239/BA238 or BA183/BA178.

Red eyes ATL-LON and LON-ATL might have more than a chance than day-time ATL-LHR.
That's if DL ATL has plenty of late evening arrivals around 2400 and early morning departures around 0600. Be reminded that LON-ATL red-eyes won't be able to operate out of LHR or perhaps even out of LGW because curfew.
IMHO, PHL-LHR - be AA or BA - will happen soon, even if only a couple of days per week summer time only.

Many, many moons have passed, I once took a BA morning flight from JFK into LHR. Worst case of jet lag I've ever had. Left at a great hour, easy flight, landed in London I swear in the middle of the night, wide awake - probably around 10 or 11PM locally, couldn't sleep, wound up having to wake up at 2AM my time to catch a flight into Italy. Never, ever again! Could be wrong, but I suspect both passengers and crew would have the same reaction I had back in the '70s. It really sounds like a reasonable, great idea, but it sure didn't work for me.

UA's IAD-LHR daytime flight does well but is also uses smaller equipment with the 757. On a side route topic for DL daytime non traditional routes, I do remember years ago when DL had a daytime ATL-GRU flight. Didn't last too long

georgiaame wrote:

Many, many moons have passed, I once took a BA morning flight from JFK into LHR. Worst case of jet lag I've ever had. Left at a great hour, easy flight, landed in London I swear in the middle of the night, wide awake - probably around 10 or 11PM locally, couldn't sleep, wound up having to wake up at 2AM my time to catch a flight into Italy. Never, ever again! Could be wrong, but I suspect both passengers and crew would have the same reaction I had back in the '70s. It really sounds like a reasonable, great idea, but it sure didn't work for me.

Different strokes and all that.

Personally, I hate the night flights and arriving at LHR at dawn. If I have slept on the flight, I’ve slept badly. And now I have to push through until the evening.

I’d much prefer an LHR evening arrival.

There is a chequered history of daylight flights into LHR - several attempts in different places haven't worked. In the case of ATL, it's never been tried but with South America early arrivals into ATL and a bank of domestic arrivals into ATL by 7.30 - 8am then it may not be completely daft. My guess is that DL's South America routes into ATL do just fine and don't need additional feed, which would be the new market segment opened up by having an ATL-LHR daylighter.

Fun fact: Years ago, I want to say 2009ish DL did run an evening ATL-LGW flight alongside the LHR flight shortly after they were allowed to operate it. It operated MCO-ATL-LGW and was on a 763.

I love the daytime TATL east-bound flights. I cannot sleep on an airplane (even in J). It allows me to get some work done and arrive when its time to go to bed instead of having to try to push through an entire day in a haze.

2travel2know2 wrote:

lhrsfosyd wrote:

Atlanta won't be able to support a day flight to London. The flight is too long, not enough O&D and not enough transfer traffic at either end. The only other city in North America that could possibly have a day flight to London is Philadelphia with late evening departure by BA from London and morning return similar to BA239/BA238 or BA183/BA178.

Red eyes ATL-LON and LON-ATL might have more than a chance than day-time ATL-LHR.
That's if DL ATL has plenty of late evening arrivals around 2400 and early morning departures around 0600. Be reminded that LON-ATL red-eyes won't be able to operate out of LHR or perhaps even out of LGW because curfew.
IMHO, PHL-LHR - be AA or BA - will happen soon, even if only a couple of days per week summer time only.

I think red eye LHR-MIA would work very well but ATL is a much much smaller market I can't see that happening.

The problem with a daylight ATL-LHR flight is that it wouldn't catch enough connecting traffic from passengers originating from cities over about an hour from ATL. If you look at flights arriving into ATL before 0830, you will notice that, with the exception of redeyes, most all of them come from places that are within the southeastern part of the US (JAX/AVL/CHS/CLT/TYS, etc.) Those flights are generally the RON sections that DL runs out of ATL after 10p the previous night. I think to make a determination whether the flight would get enough flow, you'd have to pull data and see where passengers to LON are originating and add those up to see if the potential connecting mix would be similar to that of the afternoon/evening flights. My guess is that it would be relatively weak. That said, ATL-originating traffic may be growing, and the popularity of the daylight flights is clear, so there may still be some salience to the idea.

usdcaguy wrote:

The problem with a daylight ATL-LHR flight is that it wouldn't catch enough connecting traffic from passengers originating from cities over about an hour from ATL. If you look at flights arriving into ATL before 0830, you will notice that, with the exception of redeyes, most all of them come from places that are within the southeastern part of the US (JAX/AVL/CHS/CLT/TYS, etc.) Those flights are generally the RON sections that DL runs out of ATL after 10p the previous night. I think to make a determination whether the flight would get enough flow, you'd have to pull data and see where passengers to LON are originating and add those up to see if the potential connecting mix would be similar to that of the afternoon/evening flights. My guess is that it would be relatively weak. That said, ATL-originating traffic may be growing, and the popularity of the daylight flights is clear, so there may still be some salience to the idea.

As a quick look at flights, it's hit and miss-most of the Southeast, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New York have arrivals at or before 830A. Plus overnight redeyes (although I can't really see the appeal of that, maybe except from LAS). What you miss in terms of key markets are Chicago, Minneapolis, Milwaukee, Kansas City, Dallas, Houston, Austin, San Antonio, Boston, Hartford. Basically the farther reaches of the Midwest, Texas, and New England are too far. Texas could be fixed with a 30 minute tweak or so, and if you had a 0500 MSP departure you could make that key market work.

As a step further, I took a look at what a theoretical 930-945a DTW-LHR would catch in terms of connections. You gain those New England markets and the upper Midwest, could hold most of Florida (FLL/MIA might be tricky), and still miss Texas. You also lose feed totally from markets like CAE, JAN, MGM, MLB, PNS, and DAB. That's significant because I think those Florida markets in particular might be something of a draw, moreso than markets like ERI, SWF, AZO, and LAN that are served through DTW.

N649DL wrote:

Fun fact: Years ago, I want to say 2009ish DL did run an evening ATL-LGW flight alongside the LHR flight shortly after they were allowed to operate it. It operated MCO-ATL-LGW and was on a 763.

There was DL3 JFK-LHR arriving 2110 in Summer 2008 and the following winter moving to a 7am arrival for the summer. Perhaps this is the one you mean?
The daylight flights serve a niche purpose, they offer a way to fly point to point with less jet lag and hence don't offer decent connections at either end.
Currently we see only seven, all East coast with a strong P2P performance. Not something ATL offers to the same levels.
AC868 YYZ-LHR B789
AA142 JFK-LHR B772
AA90 ORD-LHR B788
BA178 JFK-LHR B744/B772
BA238 BOS-LHR B772
UA122 IAD-LHR B752
UA934 EWR-LHR B764

As somebody who used to be involved in TATL route planning for a major US airline for several years, my comment is one of incredulity. It's like a.net is trying to reinvent the wheel. I mean, don't you guys think DL knows all this and has the information available at the push of a button? PDEWs, yields, operational costs, aircraft rotation availabilities, ditto for crew, available connections, PAX surveys, and a lot more...
As always, the answer to these questions here on a.net (why doesn't airline YY fly from XXX to YYY, or daytime or with an A380 or whatever) is that it sees more potential in using its limited resources on another route or at other hours. It doesn't even need to be that the conclusion is that it wouldn't be profitable, just that using those resources to operate another route is even more profitable. So, to do the exercises done by a few posters here (of possible connections, arrival times et cetera) is futile when you have no clue what other options the airline has for using those same resources.
Sorry to be such a bore...

It’s an inefficient use of aircraft time for yields that are a solid discount to the normal prime time overnight flights—I wouldn’t count on it ever happening

The main problem is the LHR curfew. If the flight could get out before curfew, it would work to make the morning bank of flights into the USA. But to do that would require an early AM (before dawn) USA departure and no belly cargo to reduce the turnaround time at LHR. That only works from a large O&D market.

GSP psgr wrote:

While I agree that ATL isn't in the same league as a BOS, WAS, or ORD in terms of LHR demand, in the case of a daylight ATL-LHR, it's somewhat compensated for in that it would fulfill a network need for Delta-providing an option for a daylight service from a trunk hub. It's similar to PMUA's IAD-LHR in that regard. Without connections, I would tend to think at best it was a marginal route. But as the UA network's option for a daylight LHR, it worked.

A daylight flight requires O&D. It's that simple. Connecting traffic is irrelevant. It's also a more expensive flight to operate, for the airline.
Having said that i've taken a BOS-LHR daylight flight to connect to a LHR-LIS the next morning. It was by far my best European trip ever as far as jetlag is concerned. Yes I wasted a day but I never felt the jetlag so in the end I really felt like I was able to take full advantage of my vacation days.
The problem with the morning flight for me as a price conscious passenger is that in my experience the daylight flights are always more expensive so therefore I have taken it only once. I can't stand the red-eyes but it saves me a lot of money so I keep taking it.

knope2001 wrote:

As much as I am an advocate of daytime eastbound TATL I wonder if there's a fundamental problem on demand side

Demand is a reflection of cost. There are many more red-eyes because airlines rely heavily on connecting passengers so the red-eyes are cheaper and therefore what most people take. Airlines are simply not interested in offering daylight departures because:
1) there is little to no connectivity potential on both sides;
2) the aircraft utilization is poor
Both of these factors amount to it being a costly operation and therefore only routes with strong O&D demand can support it.

MalevTU134 wrote:

As somebody who used to be involved in TATL route planning for a major US airline for several years, my comment is one of incredulity. It's like a.net is trying to reinvent the wheel. I mean, don't you guys think DL knows all this and has the information available at the push of a button? PDEWs, yields, operational costs, aircraft rotation availabilities, ditto for crew, available connections, PAX surveys, and a lot more...
As always, the answer to these questions here on a.net (why doesn't airline YY fly from XXX to YYY, or daytime or with an A380 or whatever) is that it sees more potential in using its limited resources on another route or at other hours. It doesn't even need to be that the conclusion is that it wouldn't be profitable, just that using those resources to operate another route is even more profitable. So, to do the exercises done by a few posters here (of possible connections, arrival times et cetera) is futile when you have no clue what other options the airline has for using those same resources.
Sorry to be such a bore...

While I get what you are saying, I think there is a difference between starting a thread with "Let's have a discussion about the pros and cons of offering XX flight at YY time on ZZ equipment" versus "Hey, I've got a brilliant idea for a route that those stupid route planners must have never thought of!" I see this thread as more of the former.

Not everyone on here has worked as a professional international route planner at a major U.S. airline like you have. I don't see what the problem is with speculating or having a fact-based discussion about the industry that may actually teach people something. I can understand why you maybe feel defensive when these types of questions are asked, but please either play along and/or share your professional experience, or ignore threads like these and let the conversation be had without you. Thanks.

UALFAson wrote:

MalevTU134 wrote:

As somebody who used to be involved in TATL route planning for a major US airline for several years, my comment is one of incredulity. It's like a.net is trying to reinvent the wheel. I mean, don't you guys think DL knows all this and has the information available at the push of a button? PDEWs, yields, operational costs, aircraft rotation availabilities, ditto for crew, available connections, PAX surveys, and a lot more...
As always, the answer to these questions here on a.net (why doesn't airline YY fly from XXX to YYY, or daytime or with an A380 or whatever) is that it sees more potential in using its limited resources on another route or at other hours. It doesn't even need to be that the conclusion is that it wouldn't be profitable, just that using those resources to operate another route is even more profitable. So, to do the exercises done by a few posters here (of possible connections, arrival times et cetera) is futile when you have no clue what other options the airline has for using those same resources.
Sorry to be such a bore...

While I get what you are saying, I think there is a difference between starting a thread with "Let's have a discussion about the pros and cons of offering XX flight at YY time on ZZ equipment" versus "Hey, I've got a brilliant idea for a route that those stupid route planners must have never thought of!" I see this thread as more of the former.

Not everyone on here has worked as a professional international route planner at a major U.S. airline like you have. I don't see what the problem is with speculating or having a fact-based discussion about the industry that may actually teach people something. I can understand why you maybe feel defensive when these types of questions are asked, but please either play along and/or share your professional experience, or ignore threads like these and let the conversation be had without you. Thanks.

No, you don't get what I'm saying. But whatever... By all means, go on having this discussion leaving half of the equation out of the picture.

georgiaame wrote:

Many, many moons have passed, I once took a BA morning flight from JFK into LHR. Worst case of jet lag I've ever had. Left at a great hour, easy flight, landed in London I swear in the middle of the night, wide awake - probably around 10 or 11PM locally, couldn't sleep, wound up having to wake up at 2AM my time to catch a flight into Italy. Never, ever again! Could be wrong, but I suspect both passengers and crew would have the same reaction I had back in the '70s. It really sounds like a reasonable, great idea, but it sure didn't work for me.

Same here,I always thought daylight eastbound would be great, as a pilot. That is, til Desert Storm and we did loads of them—horrible. You’re now arriving in mide-afternoon, body clock, wide awake, dimishing dinner options as it is past 10pm arriving (UK or on the continent) and can’t sleep. Then, I did them in corporate jets, as pilot, just as awful, though more comfortable flight and accommodations. Wide awake and trying to sleep is miserable.

Same with the eastbound JFK to DXB in J, the morning EK flight is horrid. The flight arrives in the morning, exhausted, sleep all day, hard to adjust to local after one day of that.

GF

I believe we (Delta) did operate, for a very short time, a daylight JFK-LHR I think it was operated as 2day trip for us (FA)

Tristar787 wrote:

And that 8am JFK-LHR on a VS A346 does well. There are many pax connecting from that flight to VS’ LHR-LOS and LHR-DEL flights as they both depart late evening. DL can at least share in the revenue on the JFK-LHR portion of those connecting itineraries.

That is likely the best that can be done as I see it. Nowhere else in the USA, other than BOS, can a morning USA departure work that could theoretically get back to the USA in time for a morning bank of flights. The only way DL could get to that is if the operator of that schedule flips from VS metal to DL metal. That flight gets to Heathrow around 8 PM, which is ideal for VS flights to LOS and DEL and 9W117 to BOM. (VS, with a new CEO from Israel, could also tap into TLV by running a red-eye if a late-evening departure could be had, departing LHR around 10:30 PM to TLV and arriving around 4:30 AM. Then the issue is finding an appropriate departure back to LHR to connect to US departure banks with DL or VS.

From ATL, the latest a flight could leave and not have to RON at LHR is around 7:45 AM, giving about a 9 PM arrival and then turning it around quickly to push back at 10:55 PM, but one would have an ungodly 3:45 AM arrival into ATL, well before any of the other arrivals from LatAm and South Africa arrive. The other problem, other than not being able to hold for delayed connecting flights, is that one likely can't carry belly cargo on this flight because of the rush in turning the plane around at LHR. Many of the flights in the region would have to have their late evening flights the prior day re-timed to make a connection at ATL. I don't see the value of this for that region---and red-eye flights from the West Coast could better feed JFK-LHR on VS metal, although there, to facilitate connections, VS should be loaded at a B concourse gate at T4 (VS usually loads from Concourse A except for the MAN flight).

lhrsfosyd wrote:

Atlanta won't be able to support a day flight to London. The flight is too long, not enough O&D and not enough transfer traffic at either end. The only other city in North America that could possibly have a day flight to London is Philadelphia with late evening departure by BA from London and morning return similar to BA239/BA238 or BA183/BA178.

PHL, huh? PHL is not exactly an O&D powerhouse. It gets, what, 60% of ATL's O&D?

I am sure the CEOs of all the airlines in question would have asked this question themselves and researched and came up with the idea that its best not doing it.

Samrnpage wrote:

I am sure the CEOs of all the airlines in question would have asked this question themselves and researched and came up with the idea that its best not doing it.

That would be the Route Development departments, but yes, you are spot on.

MIflyer12 wrote:

lhrsfosyd wrote:

Atlanta won't be able to support a day flight to London. The flight is too long, not enough O&D and not enough transfer traffic at either end. The only other city in North America that could possibly have a day flight to London is Philadelphia with late evening departure by BA from London and morning return similar to BA239/BA238 or BA183/BA178.

PHL, huh? PHL is not exactly an O&D powerhouse. It gets, what, 60% of ATL's O&D?

Show me the data that PHL has 60% of ATL's annual O&D to LHR - the general topic of this thread.

acentauri wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

lhrsfosyd wrote:

Atlanta won't be able to support a day flight to London. The flight is too long, not enough O&D and not enough transfer traffic at either end. The only other city in North America that could possibly have a day flight to London is Philadelphia with late evening departure by BA from London and morning return similar to BA239/BA238 or BA183/BA178.

PHL, huh? PHL is not exactly an O&D powerhouse. It gets, what, 60% of ATL's O&D?

Show me the data that PHL has 60% of ATL's annual O&D to LHR - the general topic of this thread.

FWIW, Wikipedia lists ATL-LHR at 644k and PHL-LHR at 472.5k, making PHL-LHR about 73.3% as big a market as ATL-LHR.