Did you guys get the memo?
#21
Be nice if these guys had enough respect for the pilot group(s) and what those groups allowed them to accomplish (with associated huge bonuses) to at least fill us in on their plans. Why does all this crap have to be dragged out of a chief pilot, LCA, or some web board?
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: A330 capt
Posts: 236
Heard, (with the disclaimer that everything is subject to change), 7ER to DTW, with DTW focused as an Intl base. Still considerable NB (NW pre-merger) presence to feed it, but probably no new pre-merger DAL NB there. The SLC move would be pull the MD88/90 out completely because they cannot do both coasts from there, to MSP where they can, and 320 out of MSP to SLC where it can do both coasts. Have not heard if we will increase 757 (after Asia pullout) Intl flying out of where? to supplement AMS, and other long/thin EU destinations. Agree that DAL is going to become a lot less ATL-centric.
Last edited by wiggy; 12-17-2008 at 09:29 AM.
#24
"Gone with the Wind",(SFO, SEA, DFW, MCO, MIA/FLL, BOS, MSY, IAH, ORD) ....but through it all, there stands Tara (ATL)....like a Stone Wall. (to mix a few literary and historical metaphors!) [Afterall the airport is named the (William B.) Hartsfield-(Stonewall) Jackson International Airport]
#25
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Position: 7ERA
Posts: 1,216
I think you might very well see a reduction in ATL traffic - which it desperately needs IMO - and see the eggs spread around in more widely dispersed baskets - they didn't merge with NWA so they could build up ATL, but to capture a lot of traffic from other markets - where those markets exist.
I disagree. If anything I think they will grow ATL. Any reduction in ATL would open the door for Airtran. If AT were to go out of business and Delta did not need to protect it, you may see a reduction. Until then ATL will stay the same or get bigger.
#26
If the MSP "fortress hub" becomes "gone with the wind" it will be due to a lack of defense. Delta bought Western for the West coast feed and now we will have to acquire it again via Alaska Airlines. Let's not repeat history with our Northern hub.
#27
Delta management's philosophy has always been to leverage the strength and size of the ATL hub, I'd be surprised to see that change.
#28
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Left seat of a little plane
Posts: 2,397
[Afterall the airport is named the (William B.) Hartsfield-(Stonewall) Jackson International Airport]
#29
Yeah, if anything I'd bet ATL sees a bit more traffic. An example is the additional Narita flight. We can't just throw a whale on that route (in addition to the 777) and not feed it. I hate to be a glass half empty kind of guy; however, I would be surprised if Delta doesn't reduce MSP and or MEM/CVG a bit more.
Delta management's philosophy has always been to leverage the strength and size of the ATL hub, I'd be surprised to see that change.
Delta management's philosophy has always been to leverage the strength and size of the ATL hub, I'd be surprised to see that change.
There will be a lot of shifting. I bet we will see a gauge increase to ATL, not necessarily a frequency increase. We are going to be competing in ways Delta has never done before.
Then again competition is a new word around here!
#30
When they added the second name to the airport was when I started referring to it as simply "Atlanta" in my PAs. (Fortunately, the only time I now see ATL is when I go to recurrent.)
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post