Mountain Explorer

Up until recently, they were not friends. Would be more accurate to say that they tolerated each other. Friends don't relegate friends to group 4!

ashill

I think the joint venture alone is the nail in the coffin of the interport flights if not NRT service altogether. Why operate your own connecting operation in Asia when you have a local partner who can do so more efficiently?

ATOBTTR

I think DL will still have some NRT presence but it may well be to US destinations only and will focus only on O&D. HND to LAX and MSP alone won't support all the demand to Tokyo, so until DL can acquire more HND slots, I'd bet at least ATL and/or DTW to NRT remain; maybe SEA as well. I could see PDX going either way, depending on what the O&D numbers on that route are.

DL also runs two daily flights to HNL from NRT so I bet NRT-HNL service remains too.

ty97

Until DL gets more HND slots, I can't see them ending NRT service from the US. Wouldn't be surprised if all other NRT service goes away though.

TheMadBrewer

Sort of like the NW vs DL approaches to TATL market. NW flew pretty much only to LON (LGW), CDG, AMS and FRA (there was that DTW-DUS flight there near the end and other flights in the past) but flew lots of places to AMS and let KLM handle the onward. Between NW and KLM a good portion of the US population was not far from a flight to AMS.

On the other hand, DL flew from ATL and JFK to everywhere they could.

Part of this was the fleet -- NW was 747 and DC10 (then A330) which were too big for the markets DL flew with the smaller 767

So it looks like we may see DL service those cities where there is a large enough O/D market (thru SEA and where ever else makes sense with the planes they have) and then fly from everywhere to ICN and let KE handle the onward.

Works for me, if they can work as seamlessly as NW and KLM mostly did. (and before anybody knocks me, I've found DL and KLM recently working better together as compared to the past)

rylan

Well lets hope one of the first details is that KE goes back to a group 1 partner.

Follow-on would be if they can figure out something with upgrade usage. Currently upgrades on KE are basically a no-go since you'd have to book a KE flight number at full fare and try to use a skyteam upgrade... which means no MQMs.

ashill

That's also not too different from how NW handled NRT as well, of course, the big difference being that they provided the onward feed, not a partner with a full-fledged local hub.

(I do agree with others that it's more likely that NRT service to US cities without a HND flight continues than not.)

ClipperDelta

JFK-ICN is currently not double daily A380 service - it's one A388 and one 747-8i. KE's planes are actually all quite low density with the A380 at 399 to 407 seats in total and the 748 is at 368 in total.

Looking at the current JFK-ICN-JFK schedule, there may be room for DL to add a flight:

JFK-ICN:
JFK 0050 ICN 0410+
JFK 1400 ICN 1720+

ICN-JFK:
ICN 1000 JFK 1120
ICN 1930 JFK 2100

I haven't looked closely at KE's connecting banks at ICN, but DL could add a late morning or noon departure out of JFK and a return out of ICN at around mid-afternoon and into JFK around 4pm, kind of like the old JFK-NRT flight...

Longboater

There is an argument that the NYC-ICN is underserved. There are only three NYC-SEL flights, granted all three of them operated by A380s. According to a 2013 Brookings Institute study, the total traffic between NYC and SEL in 2011 was 664,659, which three times higher than the total traffic between the two cities eight years prior. A late morning departure, i.e. 11 am, and a two hour turnaround in ICN would partially fill a gap in timing between the two cities. If Delta were to add a JFK-ICN flight, it would have to be an A350 flight to gain maximum savings in fuel efficiency for a 14+ flight. With a JV in place, combined with the strong local market and connections at JFK, a single daily DL A350 flight, coupled with doubly daily KE A380 flights would definitely be workable.

Kevin Liu

Taiwan has open sky with US since 1997
https://www.state.gov/documents/organization/267341.pdf

I was told from a source that CI was actually an option before they landed on KE

readywhenyouare

Yes, Anderson ruined the relationship with KE. I'm so glad the new management team was able to salvage it. This is the best thing to happen to Delta in years. Those Chinese carriers are horrible.

kop84

I tried to google who we had open skies with and I didn't see anything under Taiwan, but I may have missed it if it was under ROC...or I just flat missed it.

Thank you for the info!

But shouldn't a government document not be in comic sans font?

bennos

Personally I would have preferred CI over KE, but for a variety of reasons (connection options, airport capacity, O&D, etc) mostly mentioned upthread KE makes more sense.

Ignoring for the moment specifics of the agreement signed with KE, DL could carve out a JV with CI in the same way that it has a JV with VS where the main TATL JV is AF/KL, but it's hard to see the same upside for TPE as for LHR.

The KE JV won't help DL's position to TYO ex-NYC. The connecting route is about 900 GC miles longer, plus stopover time, vs n/s on JL or NH. Routes to other Japan cities might be more competitive, though. Though still a few hundred miles longer, all routes require a stopover.

Kevin Liu

I was wondering about the same thing too until I verified the address was state.gov

Oh well ... maybe some one was in good mood :P

KDCAflyer

I see DL adopting a two-part approach for Asia here. The KE JV operates like AF/KL, and allows DL to cover many smaller Asian cities for the first time. Destinations that can support a nonstop will be operated using A332s and (eventually) 787s ex-SEA. The A350s might also be used, but they are probably too big to be anything more than a 747 replacement. I could see all of the A332s being shifted to SEA now that DL has more ultra long-haul equipment options.

At long last, Delta has a real partner in Asia, and both companies will hopefully benefit greatly.