A few days ago we learned that Delta no longer has plans to fly to Cape Town. We now know the real reason for this, and it’s not what we initially expected.
Continue reading: Delta Axes Plans For Cape Town Flights
Share your questions, experiences, and thoughts below.
On the whole, I'm a loyal Delta flier - I've had medallion status for over a decade - but there are some places that they make it hard to get to. In that regard, this is disappointing; I'd like to see more connectivity, not less. To wit, if I'm going to Cape Town, I'd rather it not require transit via Europe, adding many hours to travel time (and as such, taking many hours away from my trip!)
That said, I have long since learned - with all carriers - not to trust announcements of future service until such time as a bookable flight has physically flown the route. That was true in the "before times" and it's especially true now.
As far as I remember, the previous schedule left JNB at 1955, perhaps the slightly cooler temperatures at 2255 make up some of the difference too
Jim, in general I agree, but if you're a Delta flyer, why not use the connections they have from Joburg? If you're going to Cape Town, whether you've flown via somewhere in Europe or Johannesburg isn't a big deal.
I imagine delta realizes flights to SA will be relatively empty at this point and therefore they can make the trip.
For the 777LR to operate nonstop from JNB to ATL, Delta worked w/ Boeing to develop special tires and GE gave Delta permission to use the full thrust of the engines on takeoff from JNB which is usually used only on the 777-300ER (which Delta didn't operate).
It is very possible that Airbus did the same on top of the enhanced performance of the latest A350-900s.
The ATL-JNB-ATL route is an opportunity for Airbus and Boeing to showcase what their planes can do; Delta's ATL-JNB route has existed for years so it is worth investing in the route and showcasing the performance of whatever plane operates the route.
I disagree- connecting in Joburg (customs, the transfer itself, security) absolutely sucks when compared to going direct via LHR, FRA etc
How about this. Could they have gotten approval to operate further from their enroute alternates? This would allow them to take a more direct routing and burn less fuel enroute. Most overwater flying operate under a three hour, on one engine, rule. Some have permission for up to 207 minutes from enroute alternates and I’ve heard some are using/applying for a 240 minute rule. That would really allow for some very direct routings.
DL has no partners/connections out of JNB - it'd be a full-fledged arrival and turn around to check-in on a separate itinerary. I've done that in a few places over the years; it's a PITA but yes, the option is there.
DL's partnership roster is... quite dichotomous. They're very strong in some places (western Europe, east Asia, possibly now South America with LATAM) but weak-to-nonexistent elsewhere (for example, eastern Europe, west Africa, India [post-9W])
This was NEVER about actually wanting to serve CPT. It is almost 100% leisure and low yield as such. DL simply could not operate JNBATL nonstop for all the reasons described. The CPT stop was one of necessity, not desire. JNB has the business demand which is where DL makes $. No doubt UAs nonstop to/from JNB routing would dramatically cut into the yield for similar markets by offering a 1 stop vs 2 stop trip from JNB to XXX. I expect DL either found a way to get more performance out of the aircraft or opted to fly weight restricted (or both) in order to garner more premium traffic possible via a one stop connection which shows up considerably higher in GDS displays which is where the corporate $ are booked.
For a number of years we traveled to Cape Town for 3 months in the winter to golf, drink wine and enjoy great food and company. To fly SAA to CPT via JNB was always a hassle. The odd time we flew QR avoiding JNB was great but the long connect in Doha was a real downer.
The direct flight CPT ATL would have been lovely and the stop in JNB for an hour wouldn't have been a problem unless one had to deplane for Customs and Immigration.
Sad. Ending in JNB on SAA at least had a great flight and a good lounge with a no-hassle connect to CPT. Having a separate PNR would mean an extended transfer time to ensure connection. Bummer.
This isn't surprising. CPT is a leisure market and triangle routes or stopovers are costly. JNB can likely hold its own, and has in the past, even with the UA service at EWR. Delta flew to CPT via DKR in 2006-2007 seasonally on 767's and the routes performed poorly.
I really don’t fancy flying Atlanta to South Africa or vice versa on a two-engine plane with waivers that allow them to fly further from diversion points.
I will continue to go to CPT from the USA via AMS or CDG. MUCH preferred layover there, cup of coffee and your on the way. Or, if it's a long layover, get a day room at CitizenM - that alone will make your holiday! MUCH preferred to hours and hours on a plane to Johannesburg, feeling unkempt, only to deplane and replane... So close, yet so far. Bad move Delta!
They didn't have to. The 772LR, for all its power and range, had extremely high wing loading, second only to the 77W. This is because, despite their massive weight increase, they were still on the original 772A wing, just with internal reinforcement + raked wingtips. The A359 doesn't have anywhere near that amount of loading, so tire rating overrun at altitude isn't the same concern for it.
Which is laughable, because under no circumstances would you be doing so, on any carrier.
Adding many hours? ...not really.
Unless you're in the Southeast USA (which is why this flight exists), then getting to S. Africa via Europe is not only competitive, but it's also often a SHORTER distance.
For example, if you're departing from the Bay:
SFO-LHR-CPT is geometrically shorter than SFO-ATL-JNB-CPT, and the connections are competitive in timing.
Ben, the answer to this one is fairly straightforward:
When DL first took delivery of their A359s, those aircraft were rated at 268 tonne MTOW. They later retroactively increased that rating to 275 tonnes, for 11 of the 15 ships on property.
The most recent four deliveries however (N512DN - N515DN) have the same wing-twist, lengthened singlets, empennage improvements, and 280 tonne MTOWs that Singapore's A350-900ULRs do (though NOT the same fuel system modification) and thus have significantly enhanced performance capability.
These will be the aircraft that will be dedicated to the JNB nonstop.
And it's really not anything else that's changed much about the A350 nor JNB that caused this, but rather a *default*:
DL had four routes that required/utilized the 772LRs' unique capabilities (ATL-JNB, ATL-PVG, JFK-BOM, LAX-SYD) and were operated by those aircraft exclusively.
With India, China, and Australia all essentially still no-goes for USAmericans, for the foreseeable future.... it was a rather simple call to dedicate the 280 tonne A359s to JNB, which can fly the westbound without a debilitating amount of restrictions.
Dumping the 777, shows that Delta no longer considers itself an international Flagship level airline.
Huh? What does its use for a small fleet of aircraft, some of which are 22yrs-old, have to do with being an international "Flagship level" (whatever imaginary designation that is) airline....?
My understanding from local sources here in Jozi, is that Delta did not receive government approval from the SA CAA to fly JNB-CPT, and therefore has had to partner with our local airline, 4Z (Airlink).
The answer is actually a bit more nuanced.
When Delta took delivery of its first A350s, the 777-200LR was their longest range, highest performance longhaul aircraft and it was a follow-on to the 777-200ER fleet. The LR was needed as a supplement to the ERs for a number of ultra long routes.
Airbus did not offer the 280 ton A350 at the time Delta took delivery of its first copies but the A350 was not intended to be Delta's sole ultra long haul aircraft.
Many of Delta's international flights from ATL need the range and performance because ATL is further from Asia and Africa than other US gateways. ATL is also the highest altitude major airport east of the Rockies although not in the league of JNB or DEN.
The issue with JNB is altitude and not range. Even with the higher takeoff weights of the newest A350s, the issue is getting the plane going fast enough and the wing lifting the aircraft off the runway before it comes to an end. The 777-200LR was the only other aircraft that could do JNB-ATL but was a niche aircraft that didn't sell well.
JNB right now has low temps in the low 40s; by summer down there in a couple months, the lows will be in the upper 50s to low 60s. Delta should be able to make the A350 work now but it might be more challenging in the next few months. I still will bet that Airbus has or is going to make some specific modifications or changes to performance requirements either specific for Delta and this route or to the A350 as a whole as a result of seeing what the plane can do for other operators.
If Delta and Airbus can consistently make the A350 operate consistently from JNB to ATL, the most operationally challenging ultra long haul route in the world, Airbus will have achieved something with the A350 that no other airplane has done without a specific configuration or a low-selling high performance version of another model.
As for the comment about Delta not using the 777 and not being a global carrier, I would fly and have flown Delta's international aircraft in coach above American and United's (and other carriers) specifically because Delta's coach seats are wider and more spacious than other airlines including AA and UA's 9 abreast 787s and 10 abreast 777s.
Hey ConcordeBoy, here in the USA with use pounds to designate weights. Pounds of fuel, pounds of cargo, pounds for passenger weights and pounds to list aircraft weights and restrictions. No offense but you seem a little light on aircraft performance and extended range operations. Simply raising max structural takeoff weight does not necessarily solve the operating issues with long overwater flights. In some cases it can actually make things worse. (see the A300-600.)
DL flew the 777-200ER between JNB-ATL and man did i hate that plane, just because exactly that route was NEVER fully sold with the max. payload as it would have never made it!
I was trying to change my flight in JNB - ATL several times and everytime, i was turned down at the airport, DUE TO: weight&balance problems of the 777!
So i my taking, this flight was NEVER sold out in any way either, so what's the big differentce to a more sufficient and economic plane with the A350 now and it might also NEVER be sold out, but at least it's a modern plane.
To all those stand-by people . . . those might luck out too in the future, if they try to get on a DL flights out of JNB!
I wonder if it has to do with other existing airlines don’t want delta to fly between joburg and Cape Town? At the end of the day, less competition usually means more profit.
The S. African government clearly has no reason to work w/ any other country re: civil aviation now that they have no longhaul international carrier. Not the first time it has happened.
Since the A350 burns about 17% less fuel than the 777-200, they can still make as much money by not selling as many seats if they are forced to block seats which so far we don't know if they are doing.
I have never heard of a paying passenger complaining about a flight that isn't full. Given that a strongly performing route provides the opportunity to sell only the best fares, airlines shouldn't need to rely on completely full flights given that it is statistically impossible to do it on a consistent basis.
Given that most of the capacity in the US-S. Africa market is not operating anymore because of SA's shutdown, the chances are high that Delta can make it work.
This flight will be very interesting to watch, including if Delta doesn't sell all of the seats but it still remains that JNB-ATL is the most operationally challenging ultra long haul flight in the world.
And if they really can't make it work to ATL, I am sure the option exists to move the flight to JFK which is about an hour shorter.
I give up. I can’t read this blog anymore. The constant reposting of articles without any indication of what’s new in it. I get that it’s a slow time for travel, but would it kill you to just put ‘update’ at the top of a post with the new info. Been reading for 6 years now and I’m done, sorry Lucky.
"I don’t really see how it’s in South Africa’s interest to deny Delta’s flight like this"
SA wants to preserve inter-country routes for it's own carriers. Even though SAA is hardly a real airline, if it does survive the first routes back will be SA domestic. The triangle flight makes a small dent in the available seats on that route. Not that I agree with this approach, but that'd be one way it'd be in SA's interest.
The SADOT denied Delta the triangle flight operation to protect the South African domestic market and the local carriers since JNB-CPT-JNB route is the most busy and profitable domestic route in SA. Again the US department of Transport is not taking this matter fairly because SAA never operated a triangle flight in the US. It operated direct JNB-JFK and JNB-IAD via Accra(ACC) and Dakar(DSS)
Delta would have never been able to carry local passengers between JNB and CPT and they never proposed it. They simply wanted to be able to let off and then reboard passengers at both JNB and CPT that only originated or were destined to the US.
There are people elsewhere on the internet that claim they have the models that can calculate how many passengers Delta can carry nonstop from JNB to ATL under the weather conditions they will encounter; at worst they say Delta will have to block less than 10% of seats during the peak summer leaving JNB but none in the opposite direction. If true, Delta will still be able to carry more passengers than United which so far is the only other airline with proposed service between the US and S. Africa.
An interesting topic to watch but it probably won't make much a difference in real life to most passengers except for the standby passengers that won't be able to board at the last minute just because there is an empty seat.
Yeah but they would still carry passengers between JNB and CPT. You have to understand how they think.
Even if Delta were allowed to operate the triangle, they wouldn't be permitted to sell seats on only the JNB-CPT leg; all JNB-CPT passengers would have to be flying either ATL-JNB-CPT or JNB-CPT-ATL, so the route wouldn't really affect the domestic capacity on JNB/CPT.
Wow, the American govt actually sticking the middle finger to another country with Biden in office. kudos...
Delta has reportedly reserved a block of registration numbers for 13 used (maybe one new) A350s which appear to have been in Latam's fleet.
https://ibb.co/bN4Vrc8
Modern hotels and banquet halls have been doing a great job these days as they offer superb facilities to the people who take them on rent for different purposes. These purposes may vary from one person to another. Apart from marriages and birthday parties, corporate institutions book them for their annual meetings. The popular Banquet Hall in mayapuri has been a destined destination for families as well as corporate establishments for holding their special occasions. In case, you are also planning to book a high-quality Banquet hall in mayapuri for an wedding, party and corporate events then you should be very careful about focusing on a few things. As a customer, you may have some expectations from the owner of the Best Banquet Hall In mayapuri. Remember, the owners also have the readiness to help their customers with the best services.