DL Dropping AMS-BOM

[jcw]

thought this deserved its own thread
 
How can it be - can folks explain how the perfect airline lost so much money on a route and it is canceling it?  I thought only other airlines trashed regularly on this board have poor performing routes.
 
Interesting to hear others thoughts on what DL did wrong?  I'm still shocked by the announcement!  Say it isn't so!

 

[WorldTraveler]

so we can discussion for the 66th time.

no fly zones, war, 80 minutes longer flying time

it has nothing to do with perfect or imperfect other than we live in a world where missiles now shoot planes out of the sky at cruising altitude.

btw if you have a US passport, be sure and look at the warning on page 52 that says "beware: most of the world doesn't like US government policies."

can you tell us what war AA was running from when it cancelled ORD-DEL?

 

[jcw]

Right so every other airline in Europe can make the route work but little old DL could - how many airlines flying from Europe canceled their BOM segments?

 

[jcw]

So let's get this straight - So AF can fly CDG to BOM just fine - however DL can't fly AMS to BOM
 
hard to explain that one away
 
Oh wait, JetAirways can fly BRU to BOM no problem
 
Oh wait, LH can fly FRA to BOM no problem
 
only DL can't make the route work

 

[WorldTraveler]

holy cow you are dense.

let's start with some basic facts.

plz list the nationalist of the carriers you have noted plus DL.

it's a tough question but let's start from scratch.

btw, you forgot to tell us what war AA was running from when it stopped ORD-DEL service.

 

[jcw]

Unhinged are we

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

Yes, he is unhinged.
 
The narrative about the negative consequences to only DL of no fly zones and the shoot down of MH airliner over Ukraine in the summer do not pass the smell test.  He's been caught up in his own BS once again, and as usual just refuses to accept the facts.  In reality, it isn't really a big deal.  DL can't make a route work so it is dropping it.  But given how perfect DL is in his eyes, there must be extra-ordinary circumstances involved, because as we all know, DL only knows how to WIN.  Period.

 

[WorldTraveler]

speak for yourself.

I could care less how much other people post.

I enjoy discussions with anyone that can manage to stay somewhat close to the topic or something remotely related to aviation.

in this case, it should be no surprise that DL can't make the route work when it takes them an hour longer to fly than their European peers because of no fly zones over major portions of eastern Europe and the Middle East.


frugal,
would you like to tell us what other US airlines overfly Iran or no fly areas of eastern Europe? even though DL and UA both serve the Arab Middle East, the routes to get there are far less out of the way than what is involved for Europe to India.

if you knew near as much as you claimed to, you would remember that no fly zones over Afghanistan were an issue years ago - and that in part is why DL dropped DEL.

in order to fly to DEL from Europe, you almost have to overfly Pakistan because the Himalayas are also an issue.

how about you step back from your "it's all BS" routine to actually look at a map and flightaware?

education is a wonderful thing to dispel ignorance.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

frugal,
would you like to tell us what other US airlines overfly Iran or no fly areas of eastern Europe? even though DL and UA both serve the Arab Middle East, the routes to get there are far less out of the way than what is involved for Europe to India.

if you knew near as much as you claimed to, you would remember that no fly zones over Afghanistan were an issue years ago - and that in part is why DL dropped DEL.

in order to fly to DEL from Europe, you almost have to overfly Pakistan because the Himalayas are also an issue.

how about you step back from your "it's all BS" routine to actually look at a map and flightaware?

education is a wonderful thing to dispel ignorance.

 
The more you write / spin the worse it gets.
 
If, as you claim the air space restrictions are the reason for DL dropping AMS-BOM then I have to ask:  why are they waiting so long to do it? 
 
It just doesn't make sense.  There has to be more to the decision. If it was purely due to air space restrictions, I would imagine DL would drop the flights almost immediately.
 
Come on man, it's no big deal. DL can't make a route work so it is dropping it.  Why do you have to get so defensive?  Moreover, wasn't it a few days ago you were arguing that DL knows how to better and faster exit markets that don't work than even WN? 
 
You can't have it both ways.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

If you are really all about the best in commercial aviation and the whole truth, etc., I have something to ask you to consider:  could not the main reason as to why DL is dropping AMS-BOM be that it just cannot compete with the big ME3 carriers for traffic to/from  India-Europe?
 
I don't have the data, so I'm only using common sense, but have you noticed how extensive the service to India is that EK, EY and QR provide?  Furthermore, you yourself admitted that the ME3 are the biggest threat to EU carriers especially for traffic between Europe-Asia?  Yes, I know DL isn't an European carrier, but the AMS-BOM market could be the one where the ME3, even with the stop-over in the mid-east, with all their lower costs would eat DL's lunch on.

 

[WorldTraveler]

it could very well be that yields have declined to the point that flights are no longer viable.

I don't have the data for that either.

I do have schedule data and you can easily see it too.

DL has to fly over an hour longer between BOM and AMS compared to AF to fly to CDG. flightaware shows the difference between the two carrier's routes.

if you have tracked flights between Europe and India for any period of time, you know that DL is taking a very circuitous routing in order to avoid no fly zones.

DL has dropped routes immediately when it wasn't safe to fly them at all

TLV was dropped by all US carriers this summer - for a short period of time.

DL flew to several countries before 9/11, restarted some again, and then ended them including CAI after Arab Spring.

DL does drop routes when it is not safe to do so.

DL like other carriers has had to make detours around airspace in Asia when N. Korea has made provocative actions but routes continued.

further, your argument about yields should have as much or more of an impact on UA as DL. DL is operating a lot shorter flight using a lower CASM aircraft - the 333 - than UA's 777s.

it is well known that the European carriers are struggling with their flights to S. Asia because of the ME3.

there is nothing wrong with considering the possibility that economics have changed. but to completely ignore the obvious reality that DL as a US carrier cannot operate on the same route that European carriers do is just plain reckless handling of the truth.

 

[eolesen]

btw, you forgot to tell us what war AA was running from when it stopped ORD-DEL service.

Yes, it must have been a war...

Trying to compare the economics of a 7400+ mile polar routing to the economics of a 4266 mi routing? Ludicrous...

And for someone who claims to be the expert on network feed, how can you even start to compare a routing based entirely on US POS versus the DL routing relied not only on what DL could carry on multiple flights from the US into AMS, but also on its partner's flights and some local point of sale?...

 

[WorldTraveler]

you missed the sarcasm.

some people can't accept that war and security might actually be valid reasons.

again, doesn't mean that economics aren't in play as well - when you have to fly an hour longer than your peers - even the best route doesn't work as well.

I get the whole concept of network feed. I'm still asking if economics was the issue, why AA couldn't make it work.

and if the ME3 is really an issue, why is UA choosing to stick it out against much cheaper competition?

and to the point that I have repeatedly made, if the ME3 really are a threat (and I believe they are) why is AA choosing to develop direct partnerships with them while DL is staying as far from them as possible - and they seem to be doing the same with DL?

 

[eolesen]

Depending on how you want to define ME carriers, both AA and UA have partnerships if you look at the ME4 carriers (TK). DL's association with SV probably shouldn't be ignored, either, although they are definitely a notch or two in terms of quality and network contribution.

 

[WorldTraveler]

AeroFlop is not really an economic threat to US carriers as the ME4 are - and you are correct to include TK.

it's worth noting that DL and SV do not codeshare on each other's flights at all right now.. not sure of the whole story but SV is not happy with DL (join the club) so I'm not sure that there is much association anyway.

btw, for those who think I can't say a thing bad about DL, Skyteam has some great airlines but it has its share of "works in (perpetual) progress" as well.