KLM is launching flights to Portland, representing the carrier’s 21st destination in North America. However, this new service will come at the expense of Delta’s existing flight, so the implications for consumers are fairly limited.
In this post:
KLM adds Amsterdam to Portland route as of October 2024
As of October 27, 2024, KLM will launch a new year-round flight between Amsterdam (AMS) and Portland (PDX). The flight will operate 3x weekly in the winter season and 5x weekly in the summer season, with the following schedule:
KL615 Amsterdam to Portland departing 10:25AM arriving 11:25AM
KL616 Portland to Amsterdam departing 1:25PM arriving 7:50AM (+1 day)
The 5,004-mile flight is blocked at 10hr westbound and 9hr25min eastbound. I know many people probably won’t be a fan of the eastbound flight time, as a 1:25PM departure isn’t ideal for getting sleep, or for being able to check into a hotel upon arrival. Then again, it does line up with lots of connecting flight options.
KLM will use a Boeing 787-9 for the route, featuring 275 seats, including 30 business class seats, 21 premium economy seats, and 224 economy seats.
Delta is ending long haul flights in Portland
While it’s always exciting to see foreign carriers add service to US airports that don’t have a bunch of long haul flights, unfortunately this “new” route doesn’t represent much additional capacity at all. Instead, KLM is replacing Delta on this route, as Delta has operated this for around 15 years.
Delta, Air France-KLM, and Virgin Atlantic, all have a transatlantic joint venture, so it’s not unusual to see airlines adjust capacity between carriers, and trade routes. After all, airlines participating in a joint venture are usually acting as one in terms of route planning, etc.
On balance, there will actually be a bit of a capacity reduction here, as Delta is currently operating the route daily in the summer season, while starting next year, it will only be operated 5x weekly.
Delta cutting this route is pretty significant, as it will mark the end of Delta’s long haul service in Portland. Portland was an important hub for Northwest back in the day, before the Delta merger. However, in recent years, Delta has instead focused on making Seattle (SEA) its long haul gateway in the Pacific Northwest.
In the past, we’ve also seen Delta operate flights from Portland to London (LHR) and Tokyo (NRT), but those flights have been cut as well.
Bottom line
As of late October 2024, KLM will be launching a new year-round flight between Amsterdam and Portland, which will operate 3-5x weekly, depending on the season. While it’s exciting to see KLM expand to more markets, the reality is that the airline is only replacing joint venture partner Delta, which has been operating in the market for 15 years.
With Delta cutting its Portland to Amsterdam route, it also means that Delta will no longer have any long haul service out of the airport.
What do you make of KLM replacing Delta on the Portland to Amsterdam route?
Unsure if PDX still des this but at one point, I believe PDX provided free landing rights for one year whenever a new carrier begins route. If KLM is indeed taking this route, I believe this might be the incentive.
As for Delta’s Portland-Narita service, route existed before Northwest was even a partner. I remember so many people complained about immigration treatment there, suggesting to never fly thru Portland .
That was a while ago. PDX has proven that it can support multiple carriers to Europe. When BA came in, it definitely impacted DL loads to AMS in the winter- summer loads were fine. Loads on Condor, BA and IcelandAir are all strong. Right sizing the schedule should make the new KLM flight successful.
i guess i can ditch my delta SkyMiles card then.
In the 90s, before the merger with NW, DL already operated a long haul base in PDX with flights to several Japanese cities (NGO, FUK, NRT, KIX), Seoul, Taipei and Bangkok. The flights was supported by the small hub acquired when DL bought Western Airlines (not NW) in the 80’s. There was an MD-11 base in PDX, which had all sorts of issues.
It would be nice if KLM added a daily SEA-AMS (at least on a 787-9/-10) on their own birds in addition and/or replacement of one of DELTA's daily non-stops
That's a downgrade in the hard product imo. Delta has their newest A330neo products for 2x daily.
Main upside would be award tickets on Flying Blue though.
It seems the major reason Delta gave this route to KLM is so they could leave Portland for long haul routes completely and KLM will feed into Delta for connecting passengers anyway.
I have a Delta ticket in that time frame. This should be interesting...
I’m curious how my delta flights from PDX to AMS and return already booked DeltaOne in March 2025 will now be rebooked etc?
Less capacity and frequency is a negative, but KLM > DL metal all day. Between this and PDX getting an Escape Lounge right next to where this gate area is, things are on the up. Really hope that ICN flight, or maybe another DL intl route somewhere else replaces it.
As mentioned above, this flight exists largely due to Nike employees going from WHQ to EU HQ. I’ve flown it quite a few times and...
Less capacity and frequency is a negative, but KLM > DL metal all day. Between this and PDX getting an Escape Lounge right next to where this gate area is, things are on the up. Really hope that ICN flight, or maybe another DL intl route somewhere else replaces it.
As mentioned above, this flight exists largely due to Nike employees going from WHQ to EU HQ. I’ve flown it quite a few times and load factor is generally a little light, making for a comfortable easy flight.
KLM > DL metal? I mean sure if your comparison is purely the aging 767... Delta A330-neo is pretty darn competitive.
Delta uses a dated A330-300 or 200 on this route, not a Neo. It has not been a 767 for a very long time if it ever was. The PDX-NRT flight was a 767 IIRC.
not to be confused with an even more dated AA or UA 777-200ER both of which are older than DL's A330CEO fleet.
and the A330 has wider seats in coach and AA and UA's 772s don't have business class suites.
Apparently, tim has a fat ass that he pays attention to millimeters of seat width difference in coach for longhaul flights where he goes standby on delta
Personally, I fly business on those planes and delta is 3” less width there on the a330 vs AA and United 77e
Try again, tim. Though it was an admirable attempt to ignore facts for your usual data manipulation
your comment, as usual, makes no sense.
If I have a fat ass, why would I be comfortable in a narrower seat?
don't do drugs and then get on the internet, Max.
Learn to read before replying, Timmy
I can read just fine. You can't think and articulate rationally.
Always such an honor when you spend your day waiting for a reply from me on an article not even on the main page… ;)
Thanks tim.
And no. You can’t read or you’d realize your big butt cares about millimeters in economy when delta is 3” less width in business class.
You really should shop around. Most airlines don’t have their business class width nearly the same as their economy product,...
Always such an honor when you spend your day waiting for a reply from me on an article not even on the main page… ;)
Thanks tim.
And no. You can’t read or you’d realize your big butt cares about millimeters in economy when delta is 3” less width in business class.
You really should shop around. Most airlines don’t have their business class width nearly the same as their economy product, just delta. You claim to have the $$$ to fly business class these days (given your paltry readership, I doubt that); you’d enjoy aa or United seat width. It’s pretty generous compared to delta’s coffin seat. Facts hurt, huh?
But hey, you can’t write either. No surprise you can’t read.
I'd rather take the 8:10 pm Air France out of SFO, the 6:20 pm Air France out of SEA or the 6:05 pm Delta to AMS out of SEA.
We love Delta's PDX/AMS flight because we prefer the airbus to a Boeing plane. It's also a lot easier going through customs in Portland. Seattle is hectic and then there is a several hour wait to get to Portland with Delta's horrible flight using the dreadful Sky West.
" It's also a lot easier going through customs in Portland. Seattle is hectic and then there is a several hour wait to get to Portland with Delta's horrible flight using the dreadful Sky West."
lol what? Have you been to Seattle since the new customs facility opened? It's a cake walk, and the CBP MPC lane is awesome (to the point where Global Entry is almost pointless at SeaTac).
As for "Dreadful SkyWest"... We're...
" It's also a lot easier going through customs in Portland. Seattle is hectic and then there is a several hour wait to get to Portland with Delta's horrible flight using the dreadful Sky West."
lol what? Have you been to Seattle since the new customs facility opened? It's a cake walk, and the CBP MPC lane is awesome (to the point where Global Entry is almost pointless at SeaTac).
As for "Dreadful SkyWest"... We're talking E-175s here, what's not to like? (other than losing the lottery and having to take the bus to the plane which I'll admit is kind of annoying... but the benefit is the departure time is often better since everyone boards on time).
Portland has minimal lounges and onward connectivity pales in comparison to SEA or even SFO. PDX is an awkward West Coast airport for anyone other than Oregon residents.
Why do otherwise intelligent people not know the difference between customs and immigration?
Probably because there's no practical benefit nor consequence for differentiating the two, other than pretentiously calling attention to oneself on an internet chat forum.
Well of course there is. Why conflate two completely different things. Do you also call check-in and boarding the same?
There is no legal difference. Since post-9/11 reforms, the agency is Customs and Border Protection. Customs and immigration, previously two separate functions and agencies, were brought together. If we're being technical, it's really "Homeland Security" as the agency is part of the Department of Homeland Security.
Sea pdx is only 40min..anyone can survive that.
Hopefully, KLM start flights to Dallas, Detroit, Newark, and Seattle in the near future. Those would be great destinations for there network.
Not going to happen, unless Delta does a huge amount of transatlantic expansion in its own right. Capacity adjustments have to be balanced off between the two (and Air France) as per the terms of their labor agreements.
Air France is a much better option than KLM. What's going to be interesting is SAS post-September.
They don’t have the capacity. Air France also operates those routes.
Being from PDX I'd rather fly KLM than delta for the quality difference. The slight decrease in frequency could call for a quick hop up to SeaTac for SEA-AMS if that better suits my schedule. Big downside for me is that finding a nonstop PDX-AMS business award seat will be even more elusive with the more limited flight schedule.
But you weren't even getting any PDX-AMS award space to begin with with Delta operating it. This is actually good because now you can book KLM savers on Flying Blue and Virgin Atlantic.
you could. Delta 50k 5.60 deal was very popular and they would dump availability every 3-4 months.
That's incredible -- I don't think I've ever seen a 50k pop up on Delta. Agree about the KLM saver fairs being helpful though.
This has also historically been a very good route to use a GUC on, especially during the summer and around the Xmas holidays.
Not too surprising. I was able to book this flight one time during a Delta One flash sale (which usually indicates that it was not a heavily booked flight). At least half the cabin was non-revs.
Since DL does not have a pilot crew base at PDX, they have to create "W" patterns for crews which are less efficient than flying from a hub which is what KLM will do from AMS to PDX.
The bigger question is whether DL is giving up on PDX-ICN service, a route it once intended to start before the pandemic and also before they halted all competitive market ICN growth while waiting for a decision...
Since DL does not have a pilot crew base at PDX, they have to create "W" patterns for crews which are less efficient than flying from a hub which is what KLM will do from AMS to PDX.
The bigger question is whether DL is giving up on PDX-ICN service, a route it once intended to start before the pandemic and also before they halted all competitive market ICN growth while waiting for a decision on the Korean-Asiana merger.
DL could be swapping something with KLM over the Atlantic or could be planning to add ICN-PDX and is just swapping its current lone international route over the Atlantic for one over the Pacific.
Always an excuse for Delta’s failed international routes, right? Let’s not even get into the failure that is Seattle
Actually, the international routes and hub-to-hub flying are the only profitable flights out of SEA... So... You can call SEA a failure if you'd like, but it's not due to the international routes... And also I'm not sure why an airline would continue to dump money into a failure if it was actually a failure. Generally, airlines like to make money soooo...
thank you for confirming as you hide behind the bushes that you don't understand joint ventures.
Thankfully DL/KL/AF and VS do.
If a flight is swapped between carriers in the alliance, the revenue stays the same.
By freeing up a DL aircraft, DL can deploy it someplace else on its TATL network which is operated as part of the AF/DL/KL/VS joint venture including to a destination which is other than to AF/KL/VS hub.
Revenue...
thank you for confirming as you hide behind the bushes that you don't understand joint ventures.
Thankfully DL/KL/AF and VS do.
If a flight is swapped between carriers in the alliance, the revenue stays the same.
By freeing up a DL aircraft, DL can deploy it someplace else on its TATL network which is operated as part of the AF/DL/KL/VS joint venture including to a destination which is other than to AF/KL/VS hub.
Revenue increases by moving that aircraft to other routes - hardly a failure.
It is obvious that DL understands what it is doing which is why it made twice as much as United flying the Atlantic in 2023 while AA lost money.
Getting tired of hearing that SEA is a failure for DL. Flight load factors are always good when I fly them. I think people outsude this area--and maybe including DL execs--don't understand the market here.
1. DL made SEA a hub thinking they would force AS to fail. Instead, AS has expanded greatly, offering way more nonstops to more destinations than DL. Even as a DL 2 Million Miler, I often fly AS because I...
Getting tired of hearing that SEA is a failure for DL. Flight load factors are always good when I fly them. I think people outsude this area--and maybe including DL execs--don't understand the market here.
1. DL made SEA a hub thinking they would force AS to fail. Instead, AS has expanded greatly, offering way more nonstops to more destinations than DL. Even as a DL 2 Million Miler, I often fly AS because I can get to almost any major US city nonstop on AS. Not so on DL. Example: I flew nonstop SEA-CLE-SEA last weekend on AS, one of many routes not flown by DL.
2. DL bills itself as a premium carrier but the check-in process at SEA, even for elites, is anything but good. It was way better recently at JFK on DL, even though that airport is much busier. DL ground service in SEA used to be better.
3. Travelers here are more frugal than DL expected, even though there is great wealth in the region. Case in point: DL used to fly DeltaOne seats on transcons between SEA and JFK, BOS. That is now gone and probably was a failure because of ridiculously high fares. The celebrity factor here isn't like LAX.
4. AS isn't the only competition here. Internationally, a LOT of carriers come into SEA but fares are much higher out of SEA than from SFO or LAX or even YVR--and both trans-Pacific and trans-Atlantic distances are shorter from SEA than either LAX or SFO. That's why I believe most carriers, including DL, are doing just fine on international routes. However, it will be interesting to see how things shake out on the SEA-TPE route, where we will have gone from 1 to 4 carriers very quickly.
You don't understand joint ventures, obviously, if you think it's a failed route.
Hey Ben, any insight how early these kind of flights become available to book? Do you think we should expect it fairly soon, or not until closer to when the first flights launch?
For example, I have some travel to Europe for May 2025, most likely flying AF/KLM from SEA, SLC or LAS. If I can book KLM straight from PDX without positioning that would be awesome.
Just curious if you know how these rollouts usually work on the booking side.
Thanks!
Cam
@ Cam -- The new flight is already bookable, it looks like. I don't see much in the way of saver level award availability, but I imagine that will change in the coming days and weeks. :-)
Thanks!
This flight only exists or existed because of Nike.
That 1:25 pm departure from Portland is brutal.
Definitely a painful departure time, though the current Delta flight leaves at 2:15pm, so it is not that big of a change.
One wonders if the departure time is the reason why Delta is, in part, dropping it. All things being equal, I would rather fly up to Seattle or down to Los Angeles or San Francisco for a later flight.
This 100%.
KLM's SFO/AMS flight departs at around the same time (1;50pm). Done it a few times; not good for sleep but you get a full day on arrival.
@FNT I think it just comes with the territory of living on the West Coast. As RJ mentioned, the SFO KLM flight leaves around the same time. In the peak season, KLM has 2 flights from LAX (1:50 and 4:50pm), though off peak only has a 1:45pm flight. Similar with DL in SEA (1:30 and 6:05pm departures during peak season, just 2:35pm off peak). So during peak travel season, you definitely have later options, but...
@FNT I think it just comes with the territory of living on the West Coast. As RJ mentioned, the SFO KLM flight leaves around the same time. In the peak season, KLM has 2 flights from LAX (1:50 and 4:50pm), though off peak only has a 1:45pm flight. Similar with DL in SEA (1:30 and 6:05pm departures during peak season, just 2:35pm off peak). So during peak travel season, you definitely have later options, but the timing is terrible off peak. CDG flights are more or less similar.
The arrival time connects to almost every bank in ams except the first, so all middle east, Africa, all of Europe etc are covered. Less than 20% of pax stay in Amsterdam so the sleeping or hotel checkin is not what the schedulers look at. Plus now ac is usable earlier to in Amsterdam.
I don’t think the departure time will matter for most pax on this route. Many are O&D pax traveling for Nike, Adidas, or tech companies with strong ties between PDX and the Netherlands. The rest are most likely connecting to other KL destinations, for which the early arrival time provides maximum connectivity.
Having flown this route a couple dozen times, it’s great for O&D pax, despite the poor timing. As mentioned below, this timing is...
I don’t think the departure time will matter for most pax on this route. Many are O&D pax traveling for Nike, Adidas, or tech companies with strong ties between PDX and the Netherlands. The rest are most likely connecting to other KL destinations, for which the early arrival time provides maximum connectivity.
Having flown this route a couple dozen times, it’s great for O&D pax, despite the poor timing. As mentioned below, this timing is pretty common for many Europe-West Coast flights.
I’ve only ever flown KL ex LAX to various points in Africa, and the timing works perfectly (well, actually really tight)…in order to operate the daytime Africa schedule they need those planes in AMS early. They have a surprisingly small fleet. I have no experience with the rest of their network.
This is an upgrade. Most Europeans I know don't like flying US carriers, as their product is poor including things like food even on Delta which is supposedly one of the better ones.
Also better plane instead of those lumbering elderly 767's Delta love using on these routes.
clueless you are.
The route has operated with an A330 for years. I don't recall it EVER being a 767
@Tim Dunn - even the better plane doesn't make service overall KLM standard, which itself isn't industry leading but one of the better ones.
@vlcnc my last 4 TATL flights on DL have been on 767s, it’s pretty embarrassing for “Premium.” And before that, A333 (which is fine, for me) so I start to wonder if their 339s and 359s actually exist
@Jan the 339s do exist TATL, just out of MSP, mostly. Those A333s should be put down already...
There are 3 delta dtw ams...that is plenty of capacity.
Oh yeah? Want to actually pull up some data on that or just make an assumption? Delta has been phasing out the 767 slowly for years now... even SEA-LHR finally upgraded to A330.
This is a simple thing to study. Just pull up FlightRadar and apply some custom filters. You don't need access to Cirium. You'll see most Delta 767 these days are ATL-based to Europe or leisurely markets.
Two comments:
1. I just booked LHR-SEA on DeltaOne for early September. It's actually an A330-900neo, where the DeltaOne seats have doors. I like that product a lot.
2. I flew DL in DeltaOne on 767-300s last year from JFK-EDI and DUB-BOS. I have also flown them on many prior flights. I don't think the hard product is at all bad. It's 1-2-1 seating and more importantly, it's way better than the back of the bus.
Still golden to fly on though. Economy on those classics is certainly a step ahead of other planes.
I find it so comical how Europeans think European-based airlines are somehow superior to US airlines. Look no farther than Lufthansa and Swiss — two of the largest European airlines with well-below-average hard products and forgettable soft products. I think most unbiased folks would prefer any US business class (with the possible exception of Delta’s 767-300s) over either of those.
It’s also hilarious that Europeans act like service standards on European airlines (something which,...
I find it so comical how Europeans think European-based airlines are somehow superior to US airlines. Look no farther than Lufthansa and Swiss — two of the largest European airlines with well-below-average hard products and forgettable soft products. I think most unbiased folks would prefer any US business class (with the possible exception of Delta’s 767-300s) over either of those.
It’s also hilarious that Europeans act like service standards on European airlines (something which, quite conveniently, is really only measurable based on anecdotal evidence) are so superior. Just like service on US carriers, European service is consistently inconsistent. (In my experience, I’d even say that service on some of the southern European carriers is significantly worse than service on US carriers.)
And of course there’s simply no comparison when it comes to ground services — Lufthansa, Swiss, KLM, et al. can’t compete with Polaris lounges, Flagship lounges or the new Delta One lounges.
It’s quite funny how Europeans have deluded themselves into thinking their airlines are in rarefied air; if anything, the average European airline has actually been surpassed by the international products of Delta, UA and AA in the last decade.
lol
Same.
Sure there's a few nice pockets (e.g. La Premiere, on the few airframes that have it), but...
* intra-Euro business class is a joke in terms of hard product;
* more European airlines are adopting asinine behaviors like charging customers who just potentially paid 5-figures, for a seat assignment in J;
...Same.
Sure there's a few nice pockets (e.g. La Premiere, on the few airframes that have it), but...
* intra-Euro business class is a joke in terms of hard product;
* more European airlines are adopting asinine behaviors like charging customers who just potentially paid 5-figures, for a seat assignment in J;
* some airlines (e.g. BA) have seemingly given up on offering a premium experience all together;
* other (e.g. LH) try, but they've got nearly a half-dozen different configurations, and product consistency is nonexistent.
So yeah, definitely not sure how the superior assessment came about. But it's certainly not warranted, particularly for HVFs.
Lol, the brainworms of blind patriotism. Yes in long-haul even Lufthansa and Swiss are better than any US airline, and as many long time commenters will note I am definitely no fan of LH! This goes across the board from seats, to food to other amenities. European business class sucks across the board, but we're not talking about that and it is bad faith to deflect to that.
Many of my Dutch friends prefer flying DL to the states vs. KLM…