A couple of days ago, we learned how Delta Air Lines revealed plans to launch transatlantic flights out of a new airport, as the airline will start flying nonstop daily between Austin and Paris. There’s nothing here that’s too surprising, though it’s a cool route add no doubt.
I’d like to provide a quick update, as the new route is in the process of being put on sale, and an aspect of the schedule sure confuses me…
In this post:
Delta adds transatlantic flights out of Austin, Texas
Delta has announced plans to launch daily nonstop flights between Austin (AUS) and Paris (CDG). The service will be summer seasonal, operating between March 27 and October 24, 2027 (in other words, it coincides with the IATA summer season. The flight is now on sale, and will operate with the following schedule:
DL100 Austin to Paris departing 3:15PM arriving 8:15AM (+1 day)
DL99 Paris to Austin departing 10:10AM arriving 2:20PM
The 5,110-mile flight is blocked at 10hr eastbound and 11hr10min westbound. Delta intends to use an Airbus A330-900neo for the route, featuring 281 seats, including 29 Delta One (business class) seats, 28 Premium Select (premium economy) seats, and 224 Main Cabin (economy) seats.
I am a bit confused by the schedule for the flight. Delta doesn’t currently have any A330neo service scheduled for Austin, and this shows the plane turning there in just 55 minutes. That’s not realistic, so is Delta going to add some domestic A330neo service to and from Austin for fleet utilization, or what?
My assumption was that the plane would have a roughly two hour turn in Austin, and that there would be a plane swap in Paris with one of Delta’s other services, to make the aircraft utilization as efficient as possible.
In terms of Delta’s service to Paris, the airline otherwise flies there from all of its international hubs, including Atlanta (ATL), Boston (BOS), Detroit (DTW), Los Angeles (LAX), Minneapolis (MSP), New York (JFK), Salt Lake City (SLC), and Seattle (SEA), and also out of Cincinnati (CVG). So this will be Delta’s second non-hub route to Paris. Furthermore, this will be Austin’s first long haul route operated by a US carrier.
Here’s what Joe Esposito, Delta’s Chief Commercial Officer, had to say about this route addition:
“Austin’s growth continues to create new opportunities for customers, and Delta is proud to grow alongside it. Launching Austin’s first nonstop service to Paris is a defining milestone, but it’s just one part of our broader investment in the region. From expanded domestic flying to strong international connectivity through our partnership with Air France-KLM, we’re making it easier than ever for customers to connect from Central Texas to destinations around the world.”
My take on Delta adding Austin to Paris flights
There’s nothing surprising about seeing Delta add flights from Austin to Paris. On the most basic level, Delta is increasingly investing in Austin as a focus city.
American tried to grow there for some time, but then gave up, given how unprofitable the expansion was. Now Delta is trying its hand at growing there. Arguably Delta has more strategic upside with a big presence in Austin, given that unlike American and United, the airline doesn’t otherwise have a big hub in Texas, and there’s some geographic value there.
While Austin’s airport is growing, ultimately this will never be a fortress hub for Delta, as the growth rate just isn’t there. But still, something is better than nothing.
When it comes to this specific route, Delta will be operating this as part of the SkyTeam transatlantic joint venture, which also includes Air France-KLM and Virgin Atlantic:
- KLM also flies to Austin out of Amsterdam (AMS), and is currently the only SkyTeam long haul carrier flying there
- Virgin Atlantic tried to fly to Austin out of London (LHR), but canceled the flight after just 18 months, as it didn’t find success there
- So it makes sense to also connect Austin to Paris, given that it’s a massive hub for Air France; if anything, the only surprise here is that it’s Delta operating this route, and not Air France
In terms of the competitive landscape among the “big three” alliances, Austin is also served by British Airways out of London, and by Lufthansa out of Frankfurt (FRA).
I don’t think Austin to Paris will rank anywhere near the top of Delta’s list of profitable long haul routes, though it’s practical enough for offering one-stop service across Europe, as well as to India, Africa, etc. And hey, it’ll at least hemorrhage less money than Delta’s expansion to Asia, right?
If anything, I’m surprised the route is only summer seasonal, since you’d think there would be a decent amount of year-round demand.
Bottom line
Between March and October 2027, Delta will operate daily nonstop flights between Austin and Paris using Airbus A330neos. With Delta growing its presence in Austin, it’s not surprising to see the airline add a transatlantic link, which will offer one-stop connectivity across Europe, to India, etc.
I’m not sure what went into the decision for Delta to operate this route rather than joint venture partner Air France. But either way, more long haul service is a good thing!
What do you make of Delta’s new Austin to Paris route?
While I'm excited for Austin finally getting a flight to Paris, I'm least excited that Delta's taking over for Air France, and don't get wrong, I like Delta too, but why couldn't they let Air France fly to Austin from Paris? Oh, and with the announcement, I feel like Tampa could be next for Delta taking over flights to Paris which I hope it doesn't happen considering Air France already flies to Miami and (recently)...
While I'm excited for Austin finally getting a flight to Paris, I'm least excited that Delta's taking over for Air France, and don't get wrong, I like Delta too, but why couldn't they let Air France fly to Austin from Paris? Oh, and with the announcement, I feel like Tampa could be next for Delta taking over flights to Paris which I hope it doesn't happen considering Air France already flies to Miami and (recently) Orlando, and we've been begging them to fly to Tampa
I forgot to note that Air France already flies to Houston and Dallas
DL and its JV partners do exchange routes and flights but DL apparently is going to operate AUS-CDG because of the appeal of developing the AUS market for itself.
DL execs are quoted in other publications as saying they would prefer an aircraft w/ more premium seating than the current 339 has for DL; DL execs also just said that DL will configure its next batch of 339s which are to be delivered in...
DL and its JV partners do exchange routes and flights but DL apparently is going to operate AUS-CDG because of the appeal of developing the AUS market for itself.
DL execs are quoted in other publications as saying they would prefer an aircraft w/ more premium seating than the current 339 has for DL; DL execs also just said that DL will configure its next batch of 339s which are to be delivered in a few years in a more premium configuration - with 50+ business class seats. Chances are high that if DL execs are right about the demand from AUS that the flight will become an early high J 339
DL also said that they would like to add AUS-ICN but do not have an A350 available, the strongest evidence that DL wants to operate that flight and not give it to Korean.
The KE/OZ merger and the greatly expanded JV opens up the potential to add a number of new routes from the US to E. Asia, something no other E. Asian hub or JV does as well as DL and KE.
There will likely be a number of new routes from the US to ICN with DL operating some of them in addition to addition of DL metal in markets potentially including LAX, JFK and BOS which only KE and/or OZ operate now
as rebel used AI to figure out, DL will likely leave KE to operate ICN flights to other airline hubs.
"DL execs are quoted in other publications as saying they would prefer an aircraft w/ more premium seating than the current 339 has for DL; DL execs also just said that DL will configure its next batch of 339s which are to be delivered in a few years in a more premium configuration - with 50+ business class seats."
# biz class lie-flat seats beds/# int’l widebody aircraft
UA: 10,112/217 = 46.6 lie-flats/aircraft
...
"DL execs are quoted in other publications as saying they would prefer an aircraft w/ more premium seating than the current 339 has for DL; DL execs also just said that DL will configure its next batch of 339s which are to be delivered in a few years in a more premium configuration - with 50+ business class seats."
# biz class lie-flat seats beds/# int’l widebody aircraft
UA: 10,112/217 = 46.6 lie-flats/aircraft
DL: 5,781/180 = 32.1 lie-flats/aircraft
So United has 75% more business class lie-flat seat/beds & 44% more lie-flat seat/beds per aircraft. Imitation is the highest form of flattery even if it is eight years behind.
DL is making a hub in AUS tbh, so it makes more sense for them to fly it on DL metal over AF metal. Tampa is overserved to Europe right now, so doubt we will see them. Maybe in the next 5 years+, but there are lots of options for AF that are likely scouting AF like SAN, PDX, MSY, BNA, etc
indeed.
A 3:15 pm departure out of Austin is brutal. That needs to be at least 6 or 7 pm if you're going to get any sleep.
many flights from the central and western US leave by mid-afternoon including AA's large number of flights from DFW. It allows hitting early morning banks of flights at Euro hubs.
It is not much different from dinnertime flights from the east coast.
You arrive just after midnight body clock time of your departure city.
I suspect there will be more routes from AUS on the A339 and the aircraft swap will happen at AUS. Maybe DL will take over the KL route to AMS. maybe they open a route to MAD or maybe they open a route to NRT.
@Steve - I'd say the first one is the most likely in this. MAD makes no sense with connectivity, and AUS isn't at the level of gaining NRT service yet. Seoul would make sense with Korean for onward connectivity but it doesn't meet the range for an A339.
Impressive that an article published "one minute ago" already has over 70 comments!
@ grayanderson -- As I noted in the intro, this is an update to a previous post, so comments from the previous post were left intact:
"I’d like to provide a quick update, as the new route is in the process of being put on sale, and an aspect of the schedule sure confuses me…"
:-)
At least Mr Dunn supports an American carrier providing American jobs. With Delta it is all genuine and operating via democracy. Too many Americans today are bedazzled by sleek gaudy products into supporting airlines run from government money provided by hostile enemy states.
that is correct.
DL's network guru also just said that DL is going to introduce a new high J version of their 339s that are on order as well as return to SIN.
those that thought that DL would sit on the sidelines while others expanded are clearly suffering right now
Imitation, the highest form of flattery, and just eight years later. ;)
DL was far larger across the Pacific and in SIN before UA ever gave it a thought.
DL is RETURNING.
Glad to have you paranoid about yet another DL route expansion.
I was referring to High-J, but sure, SIN too. Good luck with that.
good luck?
that's what UA needs trying to compete w/ DL's far more capable A350s across the Pacific.
Yes. SEA, SQ's 5x/week and the competition from superior hubs. Good luck. As you said planes don't determine profit.
Mr Dunn isn't a big supporter of unions or American jobs himself.
He literally put profits ahead of everything he says.
incorrect, as is usual w/ you.
Well-run businesses figure out how to treat employees well and still maximize revenue and profits.
It is actually poor union-mgmt relationships esp. in the US that have done more to destroy the profitability of airlines.
virtually every major global airline including nearly all in the US are for-profit companies and also publicly traded which means they have high levels of disclosure to investors.
As much as you...
incorrect, as is usual w/ you.
Well-run businesses figure out how to treat employees well and still maximize revenue and profits.
It is actually poor union-mgmt relationships esp. in the US that have done more to destroy the profitability of airlines.
virtually every major global airline including nearly all in the US are for-profit companies and also publicly traded which means they have high levels of disclosure to investors.
As much as you fail to grasp the concept, American, Delta, United etc have as their #1 reason for existence to make money for their shareholders, no different from Amazon, Kroger, or Walmart
"Well-run businesses figure out how to treat employees well and still maximize revenue and profits."
For some reason businesses with more standardized craft/classes of employees like the airlines need unions or the threat of unions to "figure out how to treat employees well."
"It is actually poor union-mgmt relationships esp. in the US that have done more to destroy the profitability of airlines."
And it is almost always unenlightened mangements' that are responsible for the...
"Well-run businesses figure out how to treat employees well and still maximize revenue and profits."
For some reason businesses with more standardized craft/classes of employees like the airlines need unions or the threat of unions to "figure out how to treat employees well."
"It is actually poor union-mgmt relationships esp. in the US that have done more to destroy the profitability of airlines."
And it is almost always unenlightened mangements' that are responsible for the poor relationships. The evidence is overwhelming. The current Delta management tussle with their pilots is a perfect example. Eskimo is obviously correct.
Gary is running a story about UA's continued efforts to dismiss their covid error strategic failures which no other airline made.
DL's pilots didn't storm an externally focused marketing event as UA's FAs did - but DL pilots - and their FAs and other employees didn't have to wait five years to get pay raises. In fact, DL led the industry for all of the past 5 years in increasing pay.
Yes, UA's history is...
Gary is running a story about UA's continued efforts to dismiss their covid error strategic failures which no other airline made.
DL's pilots didn't storm an externally focused marketing event as UA's FAs did - but DL pilots - and their FAs and other employees didn't have to wait five years to get pay raises. In fact, DL led the industry for all of the past 5 years in increasing pay.
Yes, UA's history is full of labor-mgmt conflict and it was Oscar that recognized that needed to change. Scotty has taken the temperature down several notches but UA still is well behind other carriers in paying its employees market wages - which have largely been set by DL.
Kirby just feeds his employees Koolaid but even they will stop believing UA's hype as DL adds route after route into UA's highest revenue markets.
My statement is correct.
Other people have accurately noted that the current DL mgmt group has fangs and is on the offensive and that is an absolutely accurate statement.
"UA's history is full of labor-mgmt conflict"
It did which is why it amazing how good those relations are now and why it is so stupid of Delta management to be alienating their pilots. They are squandering one of their former big advantages.
you can only wish that DL would poison their relationship w/ their pilots.
The latest scheduling stuff is simply yet another example of a divided workforce and the vast majority of DL pilots do not want to get dragged into a fight over overtime pay and aggressive trip dropping/ pick up rules because most pilots don't do it.
this is a tempest in a teapot that will have precisely zero impact on DL medium or long term
I am so happy/relieved/excited... have been stuck with dismal skyteam options to India, this will open up a little bit more. Now when will AF resume their Paris to Chennai route? or will Delta do it (as they tried from 2005-2007)
Are your dismal Skyteam options to India changing now?
QR and EK are easily still your better options even if it's two stops.
4 Indian destinations on KL.
3 on AF (all covered on KL)
ICYMI, the ME3 are fractions of their former self.
and none of them fly to AUS
for the vast majority of people, multiple connections are not better.
ICYMI, the fraction of ME3 are still miles ahead of dismal SkyTeam.
and none of them fly to ELP.
for the vast majority of people, multiple connections are mandatory.
Reading comprehension and understanding should be a focus for you, Tim.
AF flies to 3 places in India. Many AUS customers will be double connecting regardless if they choose Delta. Three big cities in India, no doubt, but nothing compared to the Indian coverage from the ME3.
Though you are right, for the consumer traveling to India from AUS, British Airways would be the smarter one stop choice vs AF/DL since BA serves 5...
Reading comprehension and understanding should be a focus for you, Tim.
AF flies to 3 places in India. Many AUS customers will be double connecting regardless if they choose Delta. Three big cities in India, no doubt, but nothing compared to the Indian coverage from the ME3.
Though you are right, for the consumer traveling to India from AUS, British Airways would be the smarter one stop choice vs AF/DL since BA serves 5 cities in India.
But many consumers will require two stops to get to their destination. Should they choose two stops on Delta, AF, and Indigo? Perhaps. Or they could just connect domestically on QR or EK and enjoy a much better experience.
for someone that loves to tell other people to learn to read, you are the one that suddenly decided to expand the discussion to BA when no one would doubt that a former colonial ruler would have the best service to one of its former colonies. that happens frequently in aviation.
and the response from AGM is how most people see it.
let's also not forget that CDG is one of the most connected global...
for someone that loves to tell other people to learn to read, you are the one that suddenly decided to expand the discussion to BA when no one would doubt that a former colonial ruler would have the best service to one of its former colonies. that happens frequently in aviation.
and the response from AGM is how most people see it.
let's also not forget that CDG is one of the most connected global cities in the world and I believe AF flies to more longhaul international destinations than BA does from LHR. feel free to get out that handy company provided cirium account and give us the numbers,
India is a major destination but certainly not even a majority of any carrier's service from the US to EUrope.
Speaking of expanding the topic...
Topic is one stop vs two stop connections to India ;)
AF still serves three cities in India. BA serves 5. If you didn't catch the topic of India and one stop connections, I'm not really sure what to tell you, Tim. AF/DL is still an inferior one stop choice from AUS to India vs OneWorld both from frequency to European hub and Destinations to India from that European...
Speaking of expanding the topic...
Topic is one stop vs two stop connections to India ;)
AF still serves three cities in India. BA serves 5. If you didn't catch the topic of India and one stop connections, I'm not really sure what to tell you, Tim. AF/DL is still an inferior one stop choice from AUS to India vs OneWorld both from frequency to European hub and Destinations to India from that European hub. But it's certainly more than what DL had today.
But, given that you'll likely end up doing two stops to a more unique city in India, I'd imagine most would prefer AA/QR to AUS-DFW>DOH>India or UA/EK AUS-IAH-DXB-India vs AF/DL/Indigo AUS-CDG-DEL-Smaller city.
But of course... I'm talking about when Delta actually starts flying AUS-CDG in 2027 since you brought it up, Tim. I think most agree that DOH and DXB will be fully functioning as connecting airports by then... or we can all hope the Iran war is over by then.
Again, reading comprehension would help you a lot in replies. ;)
But again. Congrats to Austin on a new international nonstop. Great news for them!
DL AUS-CDG IS the topic of this article.
The fact that you are banging the keyboard to try to argue that DL won't be competitive to India is your invention.
good for you if you think that the Middle East mess will be settled in a few months. You would do well to actually READ the news AND history. it's been going on for centuries and is just at a new level of boil
DL AUS-CDG IS the topic of this article.
The fact that you are banging the keyboard to try to argue that DL won't be competitive to India is your invention.
good for you if you think that the Middle East mess will be settled in a few months. You would do well to actually READ the news AND history. it's been going on for centuries and is just at a new level of boil
It isn't naive to see that European and E. Asian airlines are doing much better with the Middle East in a mess.
"DL AUS-CDG IS the topic of this article"
Well, Timmy boy, you aren't replying to the article - you are replying to a sub-thread that was around how this helps people in Austin travel to India.
No surprise you used it as an opening to spout your usual DL propoganda.
Goddamn, didn't realize I opened a whole can of worms here! The two one-stop options I have to my family's hometown in India are either British and Lufthansa, each with its set of quirks (BA requires a 22 hour layover in winter for the inbound, LH has a 1 hour connection each way). Two-stop is the norm for me. But when your skin is brown, the amount of condescending looks you get from the ME3...
Goddamn, didn't realize I opened a whole can of worms here! The two one-stop options I have to my family's hometown in India are either British and Lufthansa, each with its set of quirks (BA requires a 22 hour layover in winter for the inbound, LH has a 1 hour connection each way). Two-stop is the norm for me. But when your skin is brown, the amount of condescending looks you get from the ME3 carriers, despite being professional and courteous, makes me prefer another airline. Plus more competition is good. Who knows, maybe AF resumes their Chennai route and I can get a 3rd one stop option?
Austin to Amsterdam is 3x weekly, so I'm usually stuck with 3 stops with skyteam. EK is horrible bc I have to connect with United or drive to Houston, same with Qatar. Plus with the unrest (which who knows what will happen), it's definitely not the best option.
Could see an ME3 airline considering AUS within the next 10-15 years
Delta must have had a spare plane. Austin to Paris in the summer? Doesn’t really make sense.
Austin will continue to grow, at rates hopefully far above what some expected. A solid forward-looking investment from Delta, and the one only Delta could have made. Good for them; I say this as a United guy.
out of curiosity, do you mean the city or Delta in AUS? 15 gates total, below Southwest for the long term doesn't seem like a recipe for success.
To be clear, you didn't suggest success or failure. I see that.
I'm happy for a new AUS-CDG route but Delta has not successfully negotiated anything, to date, that would suggest long term success in AUS. You're simply not building anything close to IAH or DFW...
out of curiosity, do you mean the city or Delta in AUS? 15 gates total, below Southwest for the long term doesn't seem like a recipe for success.
To be clear, you didn't suggest success or failure. I see that.
I'm happy for a new AUS-CDG route but Delta has not successfully negotiated anything, to date, that would suggest long term success in AUS. You're simply not building anything close to IAH or DFW in AUS with 15 gates. You can't even build a regional hub with that, especially when every spoke will have better frequency on AA or UA.
I get it... it's all Delta can do in the state after being kicked out of DFW but 15 gates is not a hub and certainly not a hub that can successfully maintain profitable intra-texas service vs AA and UA.
I've said it many times. Delta has never beaten Southwest in a focus city where Southwest started off larger. never. And the long term gate allocation enforces that in Southwest's favor. If Delta pulls off what they want in AUS, it will be the first time they haven't retreated against WN when WN was larger first (BNA... SJC...).
first, DL left DFW and took its assets to build NYC where it has a far larger local market than DL could ever have at DFW and larger than what AA has at DFW now.
second, you somehow manage to forget that WN was once larger than WN at RDU and the script has been flipped.
and third, DL has a far greater track record of growing in other carrier hubs than any other airline...
first, DL left DFW and took its assets to build NYC where it has a far larger local market than DL could ever have at DFW and larger than what AA has at DFW now.
second, you somehow manage to forget that WN was once larger than WN at RDU and the script has been flipped.
and third, DL has a far greater track record of growing in other carrier hubs than any other airline on earth; DL clearly is not interested in operating a hub in AUS but rather a focus city like RDU but with international service and full legacy carrier amenities - which WN at best might have in 10 years.
you can say whatever you want but the facts are that WN has retreated far more from DL hubs than the other way around.
and DL is larger in TX cities outside of IAH than UA is. in fact, UA is smaller than AA, DL or WN in most of UA's non-hub cities.
"second, you somehow manage to forget that WN was once larger than WN at RDU and the script has been flipped."
If you don't know how to read numbers and are dyslexic, sure.
Delta announced RDU as a focus city in 2018. Delta had been significantly larger than WN in RDU going back to 2000. The only exception to that was when Delta cut RDU flights by nearly 40% in 2008 and 2009 but...
"second, you somehow manage to forget that WN was once larger than WN at RDU and the script has been flipped."
If you don't know how to read numbers and are dyslexic, sure.
Delta announced RDU as a focus city in 2018. Delta had been significantly larger than WN in RDU going back to 2000. The only exception to that was when Delta cut RDU flights by nearly 40% in 2008 and 2009 but then grew back. WN was never larger than DL based on their own flying, only for two years when Delta cut 40%. Data is fun if you know how to use it, Tim.
Again, Delta has never ever beaten Southwest in a focus city dynamic where Southwest started ahead and Delta just contractualized being a consistent second place in AUS.
"and DL is larger in TX cities outside of IAH than UA is. in fact, UA is smaller than AA, DL or WN in most of UA's non-hub cities."
ok.... lol. Delta is bigger in DFW and AUS than UA. Where else? You do realize there are more cities in Texas? To include cities Delta doesn't even serve lol. What a stupid ignorant thing to say.
DL moved in precisely because WN gave up.
The bigger issue that you can't admit to is that DL has built more hubs and focus cities than any other airline since deregulation.
and DL's goal is not to overtake WN in AUS but to serve the major markets and to add international service from AUS, just as it does from SEA.
All of the extra domestic traffic that AS carries from SEA...
DL moved in precisely because WN gave up.
The bigger issue that you can't admit to is that DL has built more hubs and focus cities than any other airline since deregulation.
and DL's goal is not to overtake WN in AUS but to serve the major markets and to add international service from AUS, just as it does from SEA.
All of the extra domestic traffic that AS carries from SEA and WN carries from AUS does not and will not stop DL from siphoning off the highest revenue traffic that wants a true global competitor, something neither AS or WN are not and will not be.
As ever. Thanks for conceding that you just made up that WN was bigger than DL in RDU when DL declared it a focus city. WN was not bigger. nor has it been larger than DL in RDU due to its own effort
And no. WN is actually pretty consistent on their total flights from RDU and have been for about 25 years. WN didn't give up anything and hasn't flown less from RDU....
As ever. Thanks for conceding that you just made up that WN was bigger than DL in RDU when DL declared it a focus city. WN was not bigger. nor has it been larger than DL in RDU due to its own effort
And no. WN is actually pretty consistent on their total flights from RDU and have been for about 25 years. WN didn't give up anything and hasn't flown less from RDU. But that also doesn't change the fact that Delta was about 80% bigger in flights in RDU than WN and has been for nearly 20 years.
"The bigger issue that you can't admit to is that DL has built more hubs and focus cities than any other airline since deregulation."
Oh Tim... not you using your huge "I don't know what to type anymore" tell... "you can't admit..." lol
If you consider announcing BNA and SJU Focus cities than failing there, ok. RDU has endured as a focus city, no doubt. They declared more focus cities than anyone else and they're also the only ones that declare those.
In RDU, Delta is still about 20% lower than their peak flights in 2018 and 2019. And isn't in any leading position in RDU. They trade the lead for market share with AA about every year.
AUS is a tbd but they're certainly putting money there, no doubt.
Delta has opened up hubs. Good for them but Delta is also #1 at closing hubs they couldn't make work.
MEM. CVG. NRT. DFW. MCO. PDX. ORD (yes... ORD used to be a hub for Delta post deregulation that they closed). FRA.
great news for Austin folks. Congrats!
Let's hope Gary Leff makes the inaugural!
You too, Ben... but it is Gary's home airport, as you know.
Amazing how international flights have evolved in Austin. I remember when Austin had no overseas flights.
And only 12 years ago, at that.
"No Surprise: Delta".
And that's basically when you can stop reading the article. Delta is a very boring and very conservative airline when it comes to their route network and fleet, and many other aspects. Flying from a focus city airport in a metropolitan area that has well over 2.5 million people and flying straight into the hub of a close partner doesn't change that narrative.
But, it's great for the people in...
"No Surprise: Delta".
And that's basically when you can stop reading the article. Delta is a very boring and very conservative airline when it comes to their route network and fleet, and many other aspects. Flying from a focus city airport in a metropolitan area that has well over 2.5 million people and flying straight into the hub of a close partner doesn't change that narrative.
But, it's great for the people in Paris that they finally can smell some of the most amazingly mediocre airline service in the world if they want to cross the pond and visit Texas. I hope it doesn't smell too much like their metro trains, though.
DL manages to be one of the most profitable airlines in the world because they go where people want to go and charging fares people want to go.
a whole lot of people do not share your sentiment
@Tim,
Earth shattering announcement. Delta flying a JV route to a partner hub. Wow!
Such an aggressive move and really shows their leadership in route planning.
'tongue firmly planted in teeth'
sorry, cheek
@ Tim aka Conrad,
Also your forgot to mention the pull down in ATL-CDG, FCO, and VCE flying next summer.
More like moving around the deck chairs to utilize assets rather than some grand strategic move by DL.
Tim, we've already covered that UA makes more than DL from airline operations.
DL makes great profits but those are from fortress hubs (particularly ATL), the refinery, and credit card revenue from AMEX.
Airline operation yields and revenue are not doing as well as they are at UA.
If DL flew where people want to go while charging high fares, they wouldn't have ended *7* routes out of JFK while closing stations across the Pacific.
and yet UA DOES use the same business model as DL, Mark, and UA simply cannot translate its larger airline profits to the bottom line
It is UA that has a failed business model, not DL.
UA wouldn't have made $800 million less on its international operation and $1.6 billion in total than DL if UA's business strategy worked better than DL's.
parnel is right.... there is a ridiculously irrational group of paid UA...
and yet UA DOES use the same business model as DL, Mark, and UA simply cannot translate its larger airline profits to the bottom line
It is UA that has a failed business model, not DL.
UA wouldn't have made $800 million less on its international operation and $1.6 billion in total than DL if UA's business strategy worked better than DL's.
parnel is right.... there is a ridiculously irrational group of paid UA defenders that the vast majority of people see for what they are.
DL is simply a better run business and airline. DL's market cap is now 50% higher than UA's... or UA's market cap is just 2/3 of DL's - and it keeps falling. Investors simply see DL as a better business. and UA's financial deficit to DL continues to grow.
You accusing others of being "paid defenders" is hilarious. Do you believe that anyone cares about any other airline as much as you care about Delta? I hope Delta is paying you, otherwise you're just pathetic.
Actually a lot of people do share his view, and that really bothers you.
!! Yowzer!!
"they go where people want to go and charging fares people want to go."
Riyadh sends their regards.
You can pay double to fly Delta or half price to fly Qsuites.
It even gets better in miles. You can pay just 998,000 for DeltaOne. And that's the cost on an almost empty A350 cabin.
Truly fares people want going where people want.
And don't fluff your way as a GUC haven route. GUC don't have a very high percentage to clear anymore.
and yet DL makes as much as they do because people do see a difference.
I just had dinner last night with friends from Latin America. The wife - who makes the buying decision - stated that DL service is far better than any local or US competition even while acknowledging that DL is more expensive. Says DL's onboard service is DL's biggest differentiator.
Anecdotes can only tell so much but when those anecdotes support...
and yet DL makes as much as they do because people do see a difference.
I just had dinner last night with friends from Latin America. The wife - who makes the buying decision - stated that DL service is far better than any local or US competition even while acknowledging that DL is more expensive. Says DL's onboard service is DL's biggest differentiator.
Anecdotes can only tell so much but when those anecdotes support the reality that DL makes more money because of higher fares than other airlines, then DL has a winning formula.
there are always lower quality airlines for those that aren't willing to pay what DL charges or are willing to pass on better service.
"they go where people want to go and charging fares people want to go."
“Riyadh sends their regards.”
It appears DL is using precious wide body aircraft on some questionable flights. Interesting.
I wonder if this will be operated by their AUS based FAs or would this be something like ATL-CDG-AUS-CDG-ATL? I’m sure the pilots will be doing something like this given there is no A330 pilot base there.
Austin is such a weird market to me. You have Dallas and Houston pretty close by with many, many more destinations you can get to and it's not like Austin is the type of town where nobody has a car. And yet we're on our second major airline in a decade trying to make it work.
I'm based in a smaller city in the mountain west though so maybe people there feel worse about connecting than the people here
The tech industry and “cool” factor of Austin has definitely allowed it to punch above its weight as far as the flights it’s able to attract. That said, more quantifiable metrics like # of Fortune 500 companies with a major presence there, # of skyscrapers, metro population, etc. point to it rapidly developing into a major city in its own right. And major league cities expect major league amenities, which includes a robust airport with...
The tech industry and “cool” factor of Austin has definitely allowed it to punch above its weight as far as the flights it’s able to attract. That said, more quantifiable metrics like # of Fortune 500 companies with a major presence there, # of skyscrapers, metro population, etc. point to it rapidly developing into a major city in its own right. And major league cities expect major league amenities, which includes a robust airport with global nonstop flights and not having to connect
I guess as long as you can replace "companues" with "vacation" the Texas commercial aviation market is really similar to Florida's, where you have multiple large metros each with a significant airport within just a few hours of each other. In this case Austin would be like Tampa? Though I don't think the US3 is trying as hard in Tampa as they are in Austin
Bub, “smaller city in the mountain west…” ooh, I love a guessing game… we talkin’ Santa Fe, Bozeman, Park City, Aspen, Vail, Durango, Flagstaff, Page, St. George, Jackson? Tell me if I’m even close!
Austin is about three hours from both DFW and IAH (without traffic, which always exists and which can easily add an hour+). Then parking at the major hubs is exorbitant. I can’t imagine that many people would prefer that option over ABIA which is barely 20 minutes out of downtown.
I'm still waiting for United to add IAH-CDG. AF serves that route, but I wish United could show more transatlantic love to one of its own hubs
UA's TATL and TPAC networks heavily favor their coastal hubs.
UA ranks fairly poorly in market share in most Texas markets outside of IAH
for AA, their DFW hub IS most of their international network outside of MIA to Latin America
Because United has the best coastal TPAC & TATL gateways and AA has the best coastal TLAT gateway. It’s funny watching you trying to twist DL’s lack of the same into an advantage.
"for AA, their DFW hub IS most of their international network outside of MIA to Latin America"
It's a fun theory for those who have never bothered looking at the data.
TPAC... sure. AA does most everything out of dfw aside from HND. though in fairness, Delta won't even bid on JFK-HND which AA did.
TATL? not really. DFW only represents about 18% of all of AA's US>Europe flights in 2026
now tell us AA's TATL pax - not flights - by hub; DFW is most certainly much higher than 18% of pax.
and since rebel is glued to the notion that UA has the best hubs, then he should be able to explain why DL managed to make far more profits on its international network than UA even though UA flew more capacity.
Don't like the DOT's numbers? then tell us how to redivide the...
now tell us AA's TATL pax - not flights - by hub; DFW is most certainly much higher than 18% of pax.
and since rebel is glued to the notion that UA has the best hubs, then he should be able to explain why DL managed to make far more profits on its international network than UA even though UA flew more capacity.
Don't like the DOT's numbers? then tell us how to redivide the profits; unless you would like to tell us that UA doesn't make money on its domestic network which is what it would take for UA's international numbers to match DL's adjusted for size, the numbers UA sent to the DOT are real.
In 2026 United:
$200m > DL in net income
$2.3b > DL in cash flow
$1.8b > DL in free cash flow
+ 56 net aircraft vs +15 for DL
– $263m net debt vs + $51m net debt for DL in Q2
UA & DL both around 2x net leverage UA & DL average fleet age both 15.0 years
Since 1/1/22: OCF/Capex/FCF in $b (net aircraft added)
UAL: 35.7/25.3/10.4 (+296 aircraft)
DAL: 31.6/22.2/9.4 (+188 aircraft)
AAL: 17.3/12.4/4.9
SWA: 9.5/12.7/-3.2
Paris is overrated, pretty hot and crowded in summer times. Go in shoulder months. Hopefully AF will connect you for onward travel.
@ Ross
Can you please not suggest this better time to travel to the great unwashed. I do not want the hordes when I am there.
Much appreciated.
Shhhh... Don't tell everyone.
I have lived in France for a time and would never consider a visit anywhere in that wonderful country unless it was fall or winter.
Or, do as I do and visit the France outside of Paris. Stil, I must say the Musée D'Orsay is my favorite art museum in the world. I'd go just for Le Déjeuner Sur L'Herb.
DL will also be adding AUS-SAN - whch will actually start AFTER CDG.
DL will be increasing SJC to double daily later this year.
I'll admit, the increased competition in Texas should keep American and United on their feet.
As I have said here and elsewhere. this was coming and confirms that DL not only has the track record of doing the most hub building of any US airline - and probably any airline in the world - but will distinguish itself in AUS with a global network and full legacy carrier amenities, something WN can't match.
the only real question is how long it will be before KE announces AUS-ICN - and their...
As I have said here and elsewhere. this was coming and confirms that DL not only has the track record of doing the most hub building of any US airline - and probably any airline in the world - but will distinguish itself in AUS with a global network and full legacy carrier amenities, something WN can't match.
the only real question is how long it will be before KE announces AUS-ICN - and their 787s are better suited for the route than DL's A350s.
DL has plenty of uses for its A350s including its A350-1000s which will be the most capable and efficient aircraft on the Pacific, just as the 339 is for DL over the Atlantic.
I've noticed you said the A350's will be the "most capable and efficient aircraft on the Pacific" but you didn't say "most profitable" hehehehehe
BUSTED!!
airplanes don't determine profits. How airlines use them.
DL's international network contributed $2.2 billion of its system profits in 2025, far more than UA's $1.4 billion.
DL's largest international fleet type is currently the A330 - as the 332, 333 and 339 - so DL manages to get profits from a lot more than just its 359s.
We get it, Tim. Most profitable US carrier and the largest market capitalization around. (Have you ever watched Andor? You do realize you don’t have to work for the Empire, right? Like, might wanna check up again on Syril Karn’s character arch. Eh, good series, regardless.)
"nothing surprising" ... no, the real surprise will be if they operate the outbound reasonably on-schedule, aren't frequently canceled due to pilot scheduling SNAFUs, only to be blamed on 'weather' (or ATC 'staffing')...
Fortunately, they will operate the westbound (within 3 hours of scheduled departure time) because they don't want to have to pay EU261 compensation to all affected passengers. Interesting how such regulations are an incentive for operational reliability. Huh.
(And to be fair to Tim, technically this route hasn't started yet, so there's no OTP data yet. For all I know, everything will run smoothly, it'll be a great success, and I'll end up flying down to AUS just to try it out myself!)
@ Tim Dunn -- You're welcome to disagree with others, but please don't address someone as "hey idiot." As a reminder, you can find commenting rules here:
https://onemileatatime.com/insights/comment-policy/
And if you or someone else sees comments that you think violate the rules, please hit the "Report" button.
@Ben, the yowzers button should deduct status points instead of reinforcing and rewarding certain commenting behaviors with a gift card.
(and to be clear, hbilbao, I haven't even registered, and don't want/need gift cards. By all means, Tim, yourself, Willy, etc. can and should go for it!)
Sorry, Ben. I do tend to 'poke the bear' and 'stir the pot,' on here and elsewhere.
Tim, fair is fair. This is a new route. (And I applaud Delta for adding it.) You are correct that we do not yet have the OTP data yet. Pardon my speculation and cynicism. I meant it in good fun.
Delta has the highest cancellation rate and the second lowest on time rate according to the most recent US carrier data from OAG:
On Time Performance:
1) Alaska - 75.72%
2) United - 72.84%
3) Delta - 72.32%
4) AA - 69.35%
Cancellation Rate:
1) Delta - 3.22%
2) American - 2.95%
3) United - 2.71%
4) Alaska - 1.09%