Delta Air Lines will be cutting a seasonal route to Germany after just one season, and I can’t say I’m that surprised.
In this post:
Delta cuts seasonal New York to Munich Boeing 767 flight
In the summer of 2024, Delta added a variety of new seasonal routes across the Atlantic. Among those was a route between New York (JFK) and Munich (MUC), which is operating 3x weekly between April 7 and October 24, 2024, using a Boeing 767, with the following schedule:
DL238 New York to Munich departing 6:05PM arriving 8:25AM (+1 day)
DL239 Munich to New York departing 11:45AM arriving 2:40PM
Delta had planned to bring back this route in the summer of 2025, as the flight had been on sale… until now. As noted by @IshrionA, Delta will be cutting its seasonal service between New York and Munich, and the flight is no longer on sale.
Delta will continue to fly from both Atlanta (ATL) and Detroit (DTW) to Munich (the former is year-round, the latter is seasonal). On top of that, out of New York, Delta will continue to fly to Frankfurt (FRA) 3-7x weekly, on a year-round basis.
This will be Delta’s third route cut to Germany in recent times, with the two other routes being much more significant. We recently saw Delta end its routes from Atlanta to both Dusseldorf (DUS) and Stuttgart (STR). Those were both unique routes, as no other airline operated transatlantic flights from those airports.
I’m not surprised to see Delta ending this route
I was caught off guard when Delta added the New York to Munich flight in the first place, so I’m also not surprised to see it cut:
- 3x weekly frequencies paled in comparison to what the competition offers, as the Lufthansa and United joint venture offers multiple daily frequencies between Newark and Munich (and that doesn’t even factor in flights out of New York), not to mention has the advantage of tons of connectivity on both ends
- While some people visit Germany for summer vacation (I mean, I do!), it’s not nearly as “hot” as France, Italy, or Spain; you’d think that a New York to Munich route would be more about business than leisure, especially with a lack of connectivity, and therefore wouldn’t be summer seasonal
- With Delta already flying to Munich out of Atlanta and Detroit (both of which have tons of domestic connectivity), the route was very much about serving the New York market
Simply put, people on the Upper East Side paying cash for Delta One mostly aren’t saying “I wanna go to Munich this summer.” Maybe there’s some Oktoberfest demand, but that hardly justifies a route. And that’s why this route wasn’t going to work, or at a minimum, wasn’t going to be the best use of an aircraft.
Bottom line
Delta won’t be bringing back its seasonal New York to Munich route in 2025. This was only added in 2024, so it’s one of those few cases where network planning folks probably didn’t guess right… hey, no one is perfect! I can’t say I’m surprised, though I’d consider this to be much less significant than Delta’s recent route cuts to Dusseldorf and Stuttgart.
What do you make of Delta cutting its New York to Munich route? Feel free to keep your response to just a few sentences. 😉
I flew JFK-Munich in May and it was packed. Munich is a great starting point for any leisure traveler that wants to do southern Germany and Austria. Salzburg is less than two hours by train. Vienna another two hours.
Boldly entering a Star Alliance stronghold, home of a SkyTrax 4* (at times even 5*) rated airline, while seated on an old, exhausted workhorse, maybe wasn't a good idea to begin with. Especially not if you have little to offer in terms of connectivity on both ends. I just know of one person who'd still call it a 'way too premium experience' and probably would argue that Germans couldn't handle so much premium, but I...
Boldly entering a Star Alliance stronghold, home of a SkyTrax 4* (at times even 5*) rated airline, while seated on an old, exhausted workhorse, maybe wasn't a good idea to begin with. Especially not if you have little to offer in terms of connectivity on both ends. I just know of one person who'd still call it a 'way too premium experience' and probably would argue that Germans couldn't handle so much premium, but I guess that's just not a big enough audience to fill several flights with.
first, anyone that thinks that LH is anywhere close to 5 star lives on another planet
second, UA has a 767 fleet that is actually older for both types than DL's.
DL is continuing the retirement of its 767 fleet. Let's see what UA does but given that they have so few deliveries coming in, they have no choice but to hold onto every plane as long as they can.
And UA's 767s, 757s and...
first, anyone that thinks that LH is anywhere close to 5 star lives on another planet
second, UA has a 767 fleet that is actually older for both types than DL's.
DL is continuing the retirement of its 767 fleet. Let's see what UA does but given that they have so few deliveries coming in, they have no choice but to hold onto every plane as long as they can.
And UA's 767s, 757s and 772ERs all have higher cancellation rates than either DL's 767s or UA's 787s. The 767 is an older aircraft; DL has simply done what is necessary to keep them as reliable as newer aircraft.
AA got rid of its 757s and 767s and are now missing enormous opportunities that DL and UA can do with their much larger international fleets. DL and UA make good money flying to Europe - DL moreso than UA - while AA does not.
UA has refurbed all of its 767s with Polaris, and they are vastly superior to DL's 767 coffins. Age of aircraft does not matter to customers.
And UA's 767 fleet has a higher cancellation rate than DL's. All the best amenities don't matter if the flight cancels.
And Polaris wasn't class leading at the time it was introduced because Delta rolled out its Delta One Suites with doors about the same time.
Feel free to keep harping about the D1 cabin on Delta's 767 fleet; DL has more 339s and 359s that have Delta One Suites with doors than it...
And UA's 767 fleet has a higher cancellation rate than DL's. All the best amenities don't matter if the flight cancels.
And Polaris wasn't class leading at the time it was introduced because Delta rolled out its Delta One Suites with doors about the same time.
Feel free to keep harping about the D1 cabin on Delta's 767 fleet; DL has more 339s and 359s that have Delta One Suites with doors than it has international 767s - of both types. A good chunk of the 767 fleet is used domestically.
UA and AA have precisely ZERO widebodies with suites in service in business class. AA is trying to fix it. UA Is not.
UA's cancellation rate is like 2% higher than DL's. And I recall a certain meltdown recently that will certainly put DL in a less favorable light to consumers.
btw, what percent of DL's fleet has D1 Suites?
just flew this last month and the DeltaOne ground experience was really horrible at MUC airport. Security took super long and the priority line was mixed with with family and took even longer than regular lines. Such a contrast to when I did Lufthansa at MUC.
A bunch of nonsense again from Tim who clearly has absolutely no idea what he’s talking about and other commenters who are more knowledgeable have called him out on his lies.
"DL will continue to grow its transatlantic network and focus on southern Europe where it has long had the largest share among US airlines."
-False. As Aaron, Jeremy, lavanderialarry, and Julie have pointed out. DL is noticeably smaller than AA/UA in Spain...
A bunch of nonsense again from Tim who clearly has absolutely no idea what he’s talking about and other commenters who are more knowledgeable have called him out on his lies.
"DL will continue to grow its transatlantic network and focus on southern Europe where it has long had the largest share among US airlines."
-False. As Aaron, Jeremy, lavanderialarry, and Julie have pointed out. DL is noticeably smaller than AA/UA in Spain and UA in Portugal and is roughly the same in size in Italy or Greece. The IAG and LH Group both have airlines hubbed in southern Europe, something AF-KLM does not.
“It is very clear to anyone that knows the details that the A330-900 burns less fuel than the 767-300ER to fly the same transatlantic route.”
-False. Delta’s fuel burn on TATL is roughly the same on the A330-900 as the 767-300ER. Approximately 1600 gal per hour.
“In five years, the 330CEOs will take the 767s place as the paid off aircraft but with far better economics than any version of the 777.”
-False. Delta’s A332 configuration seats 223 pax and burn approx 1,800 gal per hour on long haul missions. Delta’s 772ER carried 288 pax and burned approx 2,300 gal per hour on similar missions. 772ER has lower fuel burn per seat, can fly farther, and carry more cargo and pax than the A332.
You seem more interested in taking shots at Tim Dunn (not an ignoble objective, I'll admit) than making relevant statements, though.
Airlines don't care about fuel burn/hr as a standalone, they care about it as a per-seat measure. And in that sense, yes an A330-900 is going to burn way less than a 767-300. You show that you understand that, in your third claim, but conveniently leave it out for your second.
I enjoy reading your comments and appreciate the reply!
The point is to correct factually incorrect statements. I understand your point but his first argument is fuel burn and the second is economics. If the only argument is fuel burn per pax than clearly there is little point in arguing in how the 777-200ER is the least economical wide body when the A330-200 does that.
If the only argument is total fuel burn, then...
I enjoy reading your comments and appreciate the reply!
The point is to correct factually incorrect statements. I understand your point but his first argument is fuel burn and the second is economics. If the only argument is fuel burn per pax than clearly there is little point in arguing in how the 777-200ER is the least economical wide body when the A330-200 does that.
If the only argument is total fuel burn, then there is little need to compare the 767-300ER to the A339. He tries both but still manages to get both wrong.
The southern Europe claim is off too as others have pointed out.
The point - which you clearly are incapable of grasping - is that you, using an anonymous user name and acting like you are speaking for multiple people - selectively pick and choose data because you can't stand to admit that I am right.
and if the economics of the 777-200 vs 332 were accurate, let us know how many 777-200/ERs AA and UA have in their fleet compared to the 332s. The 332...
The point - which you clearly are incapable of grasping - is that you, using an anonymous user name and acting like you are speaking for multiple people - selectively pick and choose data because you can't stand to admit that I am right.
and if the economics of the 777-200 vs 332 were accurate, let us know how many 777-200/ERs AA and UA have in their fleet compared to the 332s. The 332 is a very small part of DL's fleet; the 772 is a major part of AA and UA's.
Fuel burn does matter including whether flights can economically work or not.
And the simple fact is that DL was the largest airline across the Atlantic on widebodies even for 2024; 2025 will only extend that lead. UA and AA will not be announcing any significant expansion because they don't and won't have the planes to do so.
The same supplier issues that some people love to harp on about WiFi for DL impact AA and UA's ability to even get aircraft.
DL is comfortably in the lead in terms of the ability to grow globally for at least the next 5 years.
This news about Delta axing the New York to Munich route is quite unexpected. I wonder if factors like travel demand or operational challenges played a role. It’s always fascinating to see how airlines adjust their routes based on various factors. Thanks for the update!
Worth noting that LH currently flys an A380 on this route. That’s a lot of capacity (way more than back when it was being served by an A340).
Long time Delta flier — but I’m done with the ancient Delta One product in the 767. I live closer to JFK than EWR but at this point, I’ll take a nicer hard product on UA or LH vs the dirty seats, non-working tiny TVs, shoddy internet, etc on the average Delta 767. I fly New York to FRA multiple times per year and have completely stopped buying Delta tickets. LH isn’t great (and Terminal 1 at JFK is God-awful) but it’s a net better experience than the DL 767.
This route made no sense with nothing feeding either end, particularly competing with UA and LH that have hubs at EWR and MUC.
say what?
Delta operates a 225 flight/day hub at JFK and the majority of those flights are west and south of JFK so make logical connections.
JFK-MUC for DL was only about trying to get more of the local NYC market and the few connections in the NE that would not connect over DTW.
DL clearly decided they could not get enough of the NE US to MUC market to justify the higher costs...
say what?
Delta operates a 225 flight/day hub at JFK and the majority of those flights are west and south of JFK so make logical connections.
JFK-MUC for DL was only about trying to get more of the local NYC market and the few connections in the NE that would not connect over DTW.
DL clearly decided they could not get enough of the NE US to MUC market to justify the higher costs of operating out of JFK compared to DTW which will regain the flights that were "loaned" to JFK for the JFK-MUC flight.
and, it is very possible that DTW will not get any new transatlantic flights for 2025 while JFK will get one or more new destinations. Given that JFK is slot-controlled and DL runs its facility very full, they had to choose options that would make the most money for each market. DL will do better with ATL and DTW to MUC while JFK will serve dozens of destinations that will never work from DTW.
DL seems to be dropping a LOT of seasonal and full time European routes. I think they over extended to Europe and next year won't be as busy. I feel the DL future fleet won't "fit" demand very well with the A350-1000/900 and more A330-900 which are much larger then the 767-300ER and 757-200. They have not "smaller" 200 -250 sized planes and nothing for the 150 - 200 size market. I also feel UA...
DL seems to be dropping a LOT of seasonal and full time European routes. I think they over extended to Europe and next year won't be as busy. I feel the DL future fleet won't "fit" demand very well with the A350-1000/900 and more A330-900 which are much larger then the 767-300ER and 757-200. They have not "smaller" 200 -250 sized planes and nothing for the 150 - 200 size market. I also feel UA over brought, but they have a lot of older 777 to retire and that A350 order is just to keep Boeing on it's toes. AA may have messed up by retiring the A330-200 early (the 767-757 and A330 all needed to go) but the XLR will be a game changer giving AA and UA the ability to service seasonal long and thin routes that DL can't.
That's one side of the coin, but don't you think Delta ordered those size planes because it expects to be able to fill those up?
AA is doing this because they know they are unable to fill up international routes and need to have smaller planes. AA is relatively weak at all of its non-fortress hubs i.e. JFK, ORD, etc.
Delta has grown quite considerably at JFK and should be able to fill up widebodies....
That's one side of the coin, but don't you think Delta ordered those size planes because it expects to be able to fill those up?
AA is doing this because they know they are unable to fill up international routes and need to have smaller planes. AA is relatively weak at all of its non-fortress hubs i.e. JFK, ORD, etc.
Delta has grown quite considerably at JFK and should be able to fill up widebodies. Regardless, random European routes like this are not where they will use their A350Ks. It'll be on high grossing routes like ATL-JNB and things like that.
The story of US aviation - and most of the world - is that newer, larger aircraft can operate more efficiently than the airplanes they replace.
The A330-900 has lower direct aircraft costs than the 767-300ER - but DL isn't directly replacing 767-300ERs with 339s.
Just as with the domestic fleet, there will be a step up from 763s to 764s and 332s and from 764s/332s to 333s and 339s.
The 359s and...
The story of US aviation - and most of the world - is that newer, larger aircraft can operate more efficiently than the airplanes they replace.
The A330-900 has lower direct aircraft costs than the 767-300ER - but DL isn't directly replacing 767-300ERs with 339s.
Just as with the domestic fleet, there will be a step up from 763s to 764s and 332s and from 764s/332s to 333s and 339s.
The 359s and 35Ks will be used on some transatlantic routes but those will be primarily transpacific routes; some 339s will move from the Pacific to the Atlantic.
The incessant discussion about trying to match capacity of the 763s to a new aircraft is ignorant of basic airline economics.
There is the ability to stimulate some traffic and grow revenues including to Europe; that is far less the case for markets like S. Africa where DL and UA provide the only nonstop service between the US and S. Africa and the treaty caps the amount of flights airlines from each country can provide. There is little reason to add capacity unless average fares remain higher than the amount of capacity being added.
And tomorrow's announcement of new routes appears to be heavily leaning to Italy; it may not even be DL's complete global network expansion for the summer of 2025 but it appears that it will give DL more Italy flights from 4 hubs.
You really don’t know much about aircraft if you think the retirement of the small gauge 763 doesn’t impact the routes delta serves
It’s starting to become noticeable that you just say a lot to try and cover up your own ignorance on the topics
It's obvious that you can't accept facts that paint a logical story, Julie.
Every generation of aircraft is more efficient than the previous; there is no way Airbus or Boeing would sell any new aircraft if they didn't add efficiency to their new aircraft.
It is very clear to anyone that knows the details that the A330-900 burns less fuel than the 767-300ER to fly the same transatlantic route.
The A339 costs more...
It's obvious that you can't accept facts that paint a logical story, Julie.
Every generation of aircraft is more efficient than the previous; there is no way Airbus or Boeing would sell any new aircraft if they didn't add efficiency to their new aircraft.
It is very clear to anyone that knows the details that the A330-900 burns less fuel than the 767-300ER to fly the same transatlantic route.
The A339 costs more to acquire and DL spends slightly more per seat for crew costs but the revenue generation far outstrips what the 763 can produce.
None of which changes that there is still a place for older, paid off aircraft such as the 767-300ER and that will be apparent with tomorrow's route announcements.
In five years, the 330CEOs will take the 767s place as the paid off aircraft but with far better economics than any version of the 777.
Your response only proves my point
You belong in the comment section
No wonder you spend your life here
He thinks if he throws out enough long and useless word salads, it will convince people that he knows what he is talking about.
"You really don’t know much about aircraft if you think the retirement of the small gauge 763 doesn’t impact the routes delta serves"
He's not wrong though. Delta clearly decided that it'd rather lower per-seat costs with larger and newer aircraft, rather than continue chasing marginal or small markets that can't fill them to yield.
Is that the best choice? Who knows. But that's the choice they made. If not, they would've ordered the A321-XLR like their peers.
Well maybe this route was about German demand for NYC in Summer; which is a very popular destination here. But it didn‘t seem to work well for Delta.
Many Germans are rusted-on Lufti customers who see no compelling reason for a switch to Delta.
"Delta will continue to fly from both Atlanta (ATL) and Detroit (DTW) to Munich on a year-round basis"
When did DTW-MUC become year-round? I thought it was seasonal.
@ Julia -- You're absolutely right, good catch. Fixed, thanks.
This is the time of the year when cuts and additions are announced.
As we will likely see tomorrow, DL will continue to grow its transatlantic network and focus on southern Europe where it has long had the largest share among US airlines. DL is receiving the new aircraft which other US airlines are not getting. DL leads the US airline industry in profitability on a year-round basis and cuts low performing routes when...
This is the time of the year when cuts and additions are announced.
As we will likely see tomorrow, DL will continue to grow its transatlantic network and focus on southern Europe where it has long had the largest share among US airlines. DL is receiving the new aircraft which other US airlines are not getting. DL leads the US airline industry in profitability on a year-round basis and cuts low performing routes when they don't work - just as UA did with its massive expansion last winter to the S. Pacific.
Adding JFK-MUC was about trying to get a larger piece of the JFK market to Central Europe. As noted, it wasn't even an increase in DL capacity to MUC because DL split some of the DTW-MUC flights off to JFK.
The German economy is faltering while southern Europe is benefitting from greater amounts of tourism from the US.
"DL will continue to grow its transatlantic network and focus on southern Europe where it has long had the largest share among US airlines."
And this data is from...?
as for the first part, DL is receiving 14 new widebodies this year - most of which arrived or will arrive after the peak summer travel season and could not be scheduled this year - and 11 more next year.
as for the 2nd part, DL's size as the largest airline in southern Europe has long been the case since the Pan Am acquisition on top of DL's strength in France and the Netherlands. UA...
as for the first part, DL is receiving 14 new widebodies this year - most of which arrived or will arrive after the peak summer travel season and could not be scheduled this year - and 11 more next year.
as for the 2nd part, DL's size as the largest airline in southern Europe has long been the case since the Pan Am acquisition on top of DL's strength in France and the Netherlands. UA is strongest in Central Europe while AA is strongest in the UK.
It is likely that some of the new routes will involve southern Europe.
Southern Europe constitutes Spain, Portugal, Italy, Greece, and the Balkans. Delta is absolutely NOT the strongest airline in this region - AA is strongest is Spain with United having the broadest reach, United strongest in Portugal, Italy strong for all of the Big 3 with Delta and United leading, and Greece the same with all 3 relatively equal. United is the only one left serving the Balkans in Dubrovnik seasonally from EWR (AA and Delta...
Southern Europe constitutes Spain, Portugal, Italy, Greece, and the Balkans. Delta is absolutely NOT the strongest airline in this region - AA is strongest is Spain with United having the broadest reach, United strongest in Portugal, Italy strong for all of the Big 3 with Delta and United leading, and Greece the same with all 3 relatively equal. United is the only one left serving the Balkans in Dubrovnik seasonally from EWR (AA and Delta exited).
France and Netherlands are Delta strongholds, but the former is Western and the latter also Western (or Central).
Wait a minute - The Netherlands is "Southern Europe" in your view?
Delta absolutely doesn't have the largest share of traffic to Southern Europe, when you look at specific markets like Italy, Greece, Spain, and Portugal. When factoring in seasonals, it's actually American and United that dominate those markets, well over Delta on metal.
Yeah, agree with Jeremy and lavanderialarry.
Not Tim spouting lies with no backup!?
Say it ain’t so
Would it also be fair to say that given how the German economy has stagnated in recent times, that could also explain why DL has been axing a lot of their German routes?
Let me tell you, folks, Delta Airlines, believe me, is still the *most* premium airline in the world, okay? They know how to run an airline like nobody else. People are saying, "Oh, they canceled a flight to Munich." Well, guess what? That’s called *strategy*, folks. Delta doesn’t just fly anywhere. They focus on quality, luxury, and giving you the *best* experience. JFK-Munich? Maybe it wasn’t ready for Delta-level greatness yet. Trust me, the planes...
Let me tell you, folks, Delta Airlines, believe me, is still the *most* premium airline in the world, okay? They know how to run an airline like nobody else. People are saying, "Oh, they canceled a flight to Munich." Well, guess what? That’s called *strategy*, folks. Delta doesn’t just fly anywhere. They focus on quality, luxury, and giving you the *best* experience. JFK-Munich? Maybe it wasn’t ready for Delta-level greatness yet. Trust me, the planes are beautiful, the service is tremendous, and when Delta makes a move, it’s because they know what’s best. Other airlines wish they could be Delta, but they simply can’t. Believe me! Delta is winning, and it’s going to keep winning!
The addition to JFK wasn’t actually an increase of service to Munich, they just transferred 3 of Detroit’s previous 7 weekly frequencies, bringing them down to 4. I wonder if Delta will return DTW-MUC to 7x weekly with this cancellation. Also, DTW is seasonal not year round if I am correct.
The beginning of the end for Delta, Tim Dunn and Germany.
This isn't very surprising.
TATL JVs exist for a reason, they're specifically designed to edge out competitors. LH group is a major EU player. Flying to MUC was never going to be easy to do.
I guess Lufthansa is far more premium than Delta.
Oh boy.
Not at all surprising. MUC attracts tourism for sure, but LH/UA have the lock on the bulk of corporate travel and connections and likely the rest of the wallet share on NY to MUC. Delta's flight was a redundant addition. Delta just isn't that strong to/from Germany, though more organized with better sales than AA. I'm surprised DL can make FRA work out of JFK.
Assume the brace position everyone
LOL
I lol’d
LMAO! You know it’s coming.