I don't think the infrastructure supports it. For any single airline. Especially for a large WB presence. I hate flying into there.

Terminal 9. LOL. Google it; the idea's been around for a couple of decades. It's still a dumb idea.

:D. That was my point. For a Delta captain to make the previous post is beyond my comprehension. Like it or not, Delta's chosen to reduce their downside risk by outsourcing widebody flying. Flying near empty widebodies during economic downturns has caused the demise of more than a few airlines.

I won't even address the fact that LAX is not only a facility that is 30 years past its useful life, but is also an extremely competitive market with suboptimal yields.

Yeah and I agree. I think the post in question was trying to say that there is aside potential in creating actual connectivity there, and I agree. However the issues you and others mentioned are very much in the way and will require earth shattering bribes (many many many billions of dollars) to address even small things like a couple extra gates or terminal connectivity. So odds are its not going to happen, but even if it does most to all of the benefits will go to MBA class preferred foreign airlines.

"In my opinion we can compete head to head from LAX with any Asian carrier."

The key is his use of can.

Infrastructure issues aside, he is correct. However, management has chosen not to.

In my opinion we do not and will not compete head to head from LAX with any Asian carrier. I followed A CEA 787 out just a few days ago. BTW our gate was surrounded by VA 787s as well. But I finally got to park at T2. Much better than T3, so there's that.:rolleyes:

http://newsroom.united.com/2017-06-01-United-Airlines-Announces-Nonstop-Service-Between-Los-Angeles-and-Singapore

As an old guy our almost worthless international scope language won't hurt me much. That being said, I will fight to improve it until I fly my last round trip to Sydney.

I hope the new Delta pilots are reading and paying close attention.

In my opinion this is the number one issue we need to tackle going forward.

Allowing management to outsource our international flying via JVs is not in our best interest, just like allowing over 800 RJs until our regional partners did over 65% of our domestic departures was not in our best interest.

United started SFO to Singapore last year and is now adding LAX to Singapore.

Please spare me the "we can't make money on international".

How did we get to over 800 RJs?

By line pilots repeating the excrement management was whispering in their ear.

"The RJs are saving our bacon!!!"

International widebody flying prints money during good times. It flushes money down the toilet in bad economic times. While I'm very happy to be flying international widebodies at United, our. -400s were flying sub-20% loads across the Pacific during SARS. The cash bleed almost had us joining Pan Am, Eastern, TWA and other airlines in the trash heap of defunct airlines.

JV allows airlines to revenue share without the economic risks. It smooths earnings through good times and bad, increasing long term stability.

As for dominating LAX, I consider American's facilities the best. But even with that, they won't be able to dominate LAX. Delta would do better to set up an international fortress hub in SEA.

Have you been to the Philippines? 5+ star hotel is dirt cheap, amazing service, cheap drinks and hundreds of beautiful women asking to be your girlfriend...

Countless times. That was the point of my post. Very senior.