We know that Alaska Airlines is currently trying to build up a global hub out of Seattle Tacoma International Airport (SEA), following its acquisition of Hawaiian Airlines. While the initial goal was to launch 12 long haul routes out of the airport by 2030, that number has since been increased by 25%, to 15 routes. Along those lines, the two latest long haul routes for the airline have just been revealed, with a twist.
Alaska will fly from Seattle to Osaka & Papeete
In the spring of 2027, Alaska plans to launch two new routes from Seattle — the oneworld airline will fly to Osaka, Japan (KIX), and Papeete, French Polynesia (PPT).
As of May 14, 2027, Alaska will begin operating 4x weekly between Seattle and Osaka, with the following schedule:
AS867 Seattle to Osaka departing 12:10PM arriving 4:00PM
AS868 Osaka to Seattle departing 6:00PM arriving 12:20PM
The 5,040-mile flight is blocked at 11hr50min westbound and 10hr20min eastbound. The service will operate westbound on Sundays, Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, and eastbound on Mondays, Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays.
As of June 11, 2027, Alaska will begin operating 3x weekly between Seattle and Papeete, with the following schedule:
AS987 Seattle to Papeete departing 11:55PM arriving 7:20AM (+1 day)
AS988 Papeete to Seattle departing 5:00PM arriving 6:00AM
The 4,782-mile is blocked at 10hr25min southbound and 10hr northbound. The service will operate southbound on Wednesdays, Fridays, and Saturdays, and northbound on Sundays, Thursdays, and Saturdays.
Alaska Airlines will use Hawaiian Airlines Airbus A330s for both of these routes, featuring 278 seats, including 18 business class seats and 260 economy seats. While these planes have Starlink, they otherwise have pretty outdated interiors. The planes are expected to get tip-to-tail overhauls starting in 2028, but that’s still quite a ways out.
This is a cool expansion with strange execution
These both strike me as cool route additions.
In the case of Osaka, it’s a market that’s from the mainland United States only otherwise served by United out of San Francisco (SFO) and Japan Airlines out of Los Angeles (LAX). Alaska seems well positioned here, in terms of having a good West Coast gateway, plus the general demand for travel to the region (it’s the closest long haul airport to Kyoto).
In the case of French Polynesia, it’s a market that’s from the mainland United States otherwise served by French Bee and United out of San Francisco, and by Air France and Air Tahiti Nui out of Los Angeles. Air Tahiti Nui had tried the route between Seattle and Tahiti, but ultimately failed.
I suspect Alaska’s logic is that the carrier has more ability to create demand, thanks to the incredible loyalty it has in Seattle, the Atmos Rewards program, etc. After all, it’s not that people don’t travel to French Polynesia, they just weren’t inclined to travel on Air Tahiti Nui out of Seattle.
Now, there are two additional interesting things here. First, Osaka and Papeete are served by Hawaiian out of Honolulu as well, so I can’t help but be curious if these destinations get pulled out of Hawaii. One of the issues we’ve seen is that much of Alaska’s long haul growth has come by pulling comparable routes out of Hawaii (simply because it wasn’t profitable). As of now the destinations are on sale out of both hubs, so we’ll see.
Second, I can’t help but find this whole Alaska and Hawaiian branding situation to be a bit of a mess. It’s perfectly logical that Alaska would want to fly an A330 from Seattle to Papeete, but keep in mind this plane will have Hawaiian branding. Alaska Air Group’s plan was to have the A330s based in Honolulu with Hawaiian branding, and have the 787s based in Seattle with Alaska branding. Now we’re going to see these A330s once again flying without touching Hawaii.
I imagine Atmos Rewards and Alaska Air Group frequent flyers will get used to these branding quirks, but it’s definitely an unconventional approach…
Bottom line
Alaska Airlines is launching two new routes out of Seattle, as the airline will fly to both Osaka, Japan, and Papeete, French Polynesia, with both services kicking off in the spring of 2027. The catch is that both routes will be operated by Hawaiian Airbus A330s. That’s not illogical in terms of the planes you’d think would be allocated to this service, but it sure creates some branding confusion, since these planes are supposed to operate flights to and from Hawaii.
Either way, it’s cool to see Alaska adding long haul destinations from the mainland that aren’t served by American or Delta!
What do you make of Alaska’s two new long haul routes?
IMO, adding KIX is accretive and will only help AS maintain their market lead. PPT is a bit of a headscratcher, but as noted, I suspect it will benefit from connecting traffic/loyalty.
AS is doubling down on their international growth strategies just as they paid the highest cost for fuel in the 2nd quarter among large US airlines and that will likely continue. Using 330s for these routes only adds to their disadvantage. but then UA is using 772s to KIX, IIRC.
as for branding and what might remain from HNL, the chances are high that HNL to KIX isn't profitable but they don't have the...
AS is doubling down on their international growth strategies just as they paid the highest cost for fuel in the 2nd quarter among large US airlines and that will likely continue. Using 330s for these routes only adds to their disadvantage. but then UA is using 772s to KIX, IIRC.
as for branding and what might remain from HNL, the chances are high that HNL to KIX isn't profitable but they don't have the available planes are the 330s. The chances are getting higher that they will ditch the Hawaiian brand in a few years because they can't operationally execute on it.
Nah, these are actually cool new routes. You’re just jealous Delta isn’t operating them, and you know AS is DL’s real competitor at SEA. High fuel costs impact everyone (but isn’t everything). You’re basically suggesting they shouldn’t fly their planes. Psh.
UA, not DL, is the real competitor on these routes; SEA vs. SFO. I have said many times that UA is as much impacted by AS' int'l growth as DL is.
and, no, fuel costs do not impact everyone the same. West coast fuel is more costly than elsewhere and other carriers including AA and DL are using new generation aircraft over the Pacific where long flights justify the better fuel burn. DL does have...
UA, not DL, is the real competitor on these routes; SEA vs. SFO. I have said many times that UA is as much impacted by AS' int'l growth as DL is.
and, no, fuel costs do not impact everyone the same. West coast fuel is more costly than elsewhere and other carriers including AA and DL are using new generation aircraft over the Pacific where long flights justify the better fuel burn. DL does have a significant fuel cost advantage that was seen not just in fuel costs for the 2nd quarter, will exist for the 3rd quarter to a smaller extent and will be seen in the 4th quarter and beyond - or until the Middle East and Ukraine mess is settled -your guess is as good as anyone's but the midterms aren't going to make a difference and might push things up to a new level of craziness.
AS is still a business just like every other US airline; signing up for a bunch of unprofitable growth isn't going to help AS.
AS reports its earnings later this week. Analysts expect a small profit for the third quarter will lead to a loss for 2026 as a whole
DL failed on SEA-KIX. I think AS has a better chance here, given it is significantly more entrenched in the SEA local market than DL is, but KIX is a difficult market for US carriers and for the Japan based ones as well, when it comes to US nonstops.