FlyingHigh20

You'd be wasting your time. They'll literally delete your e-mail and think nothing of it. Routes arent decided by anecdotal e-mails sent by flyers. They are done based on research, contracts with corporations, and fairly in-depth studies by Planning departments and network optimization groups.

Clearly RDU-LAX is/was not profitable the first time around, nor is there any reason to suggest that if they were to bring it back, the results would be any different. If you want a direct flight to LAX, your best bet is to move out of the sleepy RDU area and move into a larger metropolitan area or even move to Charlotte and fly the direct on USAirways.

ma91pmh

LOL

However the business community here in RDU/Triangle area seems to be unified in demand for RDU-LAX. I am really not sure how either Delta, AA or WN can't make it work. I don't think DL help themselves making it a red-eye return.

Likewise given size of the hub I can't see how DL could not make SLC work. Like I said before if WN can make DEN of all places work fine DAILY for years I am pretty sure DL can make a success of SLC

TTT

And on that note, DL better start it before WN jumps in and starts either LAX-RDU or SLC-RDU. They have the feed at all three airports - I think it is just a matter of time.

DaveNC

Furthermore, for the hub-and-spoke airlines, Delta is somewhat non-competitive in this area. There are a number of destinations to smaller western cities that I can make with one hop on AA (through DFW) that require 2 stops on DL.

Having lived in ATL for 15 years before I moved here, I would not call RDU "sleepy." DL apparently thought is was worth trying to seize with the DMQM promotion, but I believe they would have better luck keeping long-term business here with a direct flight to points west. I keep hoping that maybe AS will pick up the RDU-LAX slack -- it would be a good second choice.

Of course,there was also the evanescent RDU-CDG, but that's another topic.

FlyingHigh20

But the question is - is it worth it for Delta to compete for these extremely small western cities? Most likely not. While sleepy may be an over-exageration, RDU is far from being a major metropolis that has enough business traffic that could warrant the thought that there's a lot of passengers originating there that want to go to Santa Barbara, Montana, or somewhere in Idaho. I'll concede though, that a RDU-SLC seems like it should have been implemented. It would've been far more useful than RDU-LAX, and at least would make western connections easier, and give more options to the passengers of RDU.

they had the DMQM promotion because RDU is an awesome feeder city for ATL, just like BNA is to ATL, PIT to DTW, and STL to MEM/CVG. These cities help keep their nearby hub flights full. If they cant keep LAX-RDU full, all they are doing is cannibalizing the LAX-ATL flight and losing money in flying a flight with poor loads on it by keeping that route on.

DaveNC

Yet meanwhile they have started up direct flights to MCO, Hartford, Columbus, and St. Louis. There's an interesting take on it here that basically suggests DL has picked up flights that have moderately high traffic but that that no one else seems to want (and thus no competition), but that doesn't explain the new direct to MCO. They must be trying to step up the competition with WN at that airport.

That's a very good explanation. Maybe that means they'll throw another promotion of some sort our way next year after all our statuses expire.

FlyingHigh20

Well Columbus and Hartford have always been larger focus cities for DL, so it makes sense that those cities would be served from RDU. MCO is also a huge "focus city" for DL - but more so I think you are right in assuming its in response to WN. Delta is the second largest carrier at MCO, with WN being number one. With the AirTran merger, its going to throw them even further behind in number 2. WN will be their biggest threat (making the merger for United/Continental an after thought to them). I'd expect to see a DMQM promo next year built around cities where the AirTran and WN merger will hit them the hardest (MCO and ATL are probably the biggest hit - but I doubt Delta will do a DMQM out of ATL) .

srilm

I lived in the RDU area during that time. Some of the media, as well as many of the pilots and controllers, referred to it as a "mini-hub". Not sure if that was an official term.

Apparently the goal was to focus on underused airports in fairly large metropolitan areas to service a moderate amount of flights with minimal delays. They were counting on a fairly large percentage of originating/terminating passengers (considered a requirement for any hub by most airlines).

RDU had precision runway monitoring equipment during the AA era, which allowed them to use instrument approaches to both runways simultaneously. RDU cannot do this using standard equipment, as the runways are not as far apart as say, ATL, DFW, or DEN.

SR

buffcoat

Not a word, and if it were it'd be misspelled.

It would sure be nice to have a direct flight to the west coast out of RDU. I don't think I'm going to *move* to get it, thanks.

It's good to know that here on FT we have not just service personnel but someone with a direct ear to *all* of the decision-makers at *all* the major airlines: someone who really knows how it's done. And who knows how to read for context, and read the source material others have posted elsewhere noting, for example, that the route in question *was* good for the airline in season.

You must be so proud!

6P&E

Nonstop RDU-LAX is nice, but when it's only one flight a day (and a red-eye on the eastbound) it means a lot of travelers are going to have to pass if their schedules don't match those of the one-and-only nonstop.

ma91pmh

Agreed that an early morning outbound with early afternoon return would be much more useful.

I still don't get though why RDU-SLC was taken away. As you point out travelers will use the alternative connections to west coast so plenty of LAX and SFO traffic would go through, as well as other smaller west coast destinations. I guess DL figure that going through ATL is a wash, but still cannot believe they cannot squeeze in one or even two dailies to their hub in Utah

sxf24

With MSP as part of the family, more cities in the west are now available with a single connection. The destinations that still require a double connection through SLC are probably all served via CRJ with ~2 flights a day. In most of those markets, DL will be the dominant (or only) option, which significantly reduces the competitive disadvantage of requiring double connections.

bwhite

They changed contractors last year IIRC and the new company is a PITA. They run a minimal staff @ RDU so when there are more than two planes at gates wait times go way up. Same crew loads the outbound planes so way too often long baggage times are the norm (priority is outbound to maintain departure times). At least now priority bags tags seem to work here. AA bags always arrive much faster @ RDU so it isn't the terminal design.

On a side note, the same contractor brings the planes over in the morning from the overnight parking area and they are known to bring the wrong plane over way too often. Really ticks me off when I miss my connection in ATL because an MD88 is brought over when it should be something else. It takes 45 minutes to get it straightened out. Local DL staff are not happy with them either.

aa4ever

Whatever happened to RDU-CDG? I remember that they announced it (and I was psyched) and then a couple months later said they were delaying it, and then we never heard about it again. Why go through all that work when nothing ever came of it? And I assume no chance we'll be seeing it in the nearish future?

6P&E

I can't imagine it will be taking off any time soon. In a few years DL may actually try it on a seasonal basis, but if the desultory RDU-LAX service is any indicator, I don't think a RDU-CDG route is a very sure thing for the long run.

We know that there are some economic ties that make the AA RDU-LON flight viable. What are the ties between the Triangle and PAR that might make this route possible? ....specifically what would assure paid full seats in the forward cabin? and let's face it, CDG is a horrible connecting airport for pax continuing with an AF flight.