Archive for the 'Hawaiian' CategoryPage 2 of 3

Airlines Complain About Haneda Slots

Published
by
Dan Webb
on May 21, 2010
in Continental, Delta, Hawaiian and United
. 1 Comment

A short while back the DOT issued a tentative decision about the four slots allocated to American carrier’s at Tokyo’s Haneda airport, which will be opening for international flights this fall. To review – Hawaiian got one slot for Honolulu, American got one for JFK, and Delta got two for Los Angeles and Detroit. The DOT opened up a ten-day comment period, and now that that’s ended let’s take a look at what the airlines had to say.

Unless I’m using Regulations.gov wrong (quite possible!), American didn’t file anything. My guess, they’re happy with their JFK slot. The airline also applied for LAX service, but considering that Delta’s 747 will have 63% more seats than American’s 777, I don’t think they have much of a case there.

Delta’s filing is nothing special. All they said was that they were disappointed that Seattle wasn’t selected, but they are very happy that they received two slots.

So let’s get to the complaints – from Hawaiian, United, and Continental.

Hawaiian

Hawaiian wants a second slot pair, saying that two will “allow it…to compete as a significant player in the U.S.-Tokyo market instead of having to compete from a position of relative weakness against entrenched incumbents.”

The airline also writes that the DOT did not properly consider the size of the Hawaiian market, and also the fact that JAL is trimming capacity there. I think this is an incredibly dumb argument for Hawaiian to be making. I highly doubt that the DOT will take a slot pair away from another carrier and award it to Hawaiian. If anything, talking about how large the market is only makes a good case for Delta’s HNL service, which would provide more capacity with a 747 while only using one slot pair.

United

United was completely shut out of Haneda, with its application for San Francisco service denied. The filing has some interesting arguments, but I’m not sure if they will help since they are essentially variations of the same arguments that the DOT has already seen.

First, the airline writes that while it does not object to one slot going to New  York service, it didn’t like the DOT’s ruling that giving American a slot would stimulate inter-alliance competition, since American and partner JAL already fly to Tokyo from New York, along with airlines in the other major alliances. OK, granted.

But United specifically objected to the awards to Hawaiian and Delta, and says that one of those three slots should be given to them for SFO service.

For Hawaiian, United says that “it is not even clear that Hawaiian’s proposal will generate any significant benefits for Japan-originating passengers, let alone for U.S.-originating traffic.” The airline also says that the focus for Haneda should be on “time-sensitive business travelers.” United also claims that for Hawaiian to introduce new competition, all they need to do is to fly to NRT, which they will be able to do easier than before thanks to the Open Skies agreement.

As for Delta, United says that the Detroit market for O&D is very small, but does offer plenty of connection opportunities. And for Los Angeles, United says that while the O&D market is huge, Delta offers very few connections. So United’s argument here is that San Franciso is a nice blend of these benefits – a strong local market with a hub to support connections nationwide.

Like I said, these are good arguments. But they’re nothing new, so I’m not really expecting to see the DOT change its mind.

Continental

The airline gets bonus points for being the only carrier to have something creative here. The airline (along with subsidiary Continental Mirconesia) applied for Newark and Guam service, and were denied. But the two airlines write that “they are not contesting the basic awards.” Yay, something different! :D They are instead asking for backup authority in case some carriers do not start service.

In its initial ruling, the DOT said they would not do this, writing that “should any of the selected carriers not begin its proposed services, we tentatively find that the public interest would be best served by allowing us to award any unused rights on the basis of a fresh record.should any of the selected carriers notbegin its proposed services, we tentatively find that the public interest would be best served by allowing us to award any unused rights on the basis of a fresh record.”

But Continental has some interesting points here. Like United, they’re doubting Delta’s Detroit route, saying its a small market, and having 747s to each Narita and Haneda might not work. So they’re saying that if Delta doesn’t start or terminate the route, they should be able to fly to Newark, since its the only other service that provides an Eastern hub.

The airline also thinks it should be awarded backup authority for Newark flying if American doesn’t get going on its JFK service, which makes sense.

Finally, Continentla Micronesia believes it should be allowed to fly to Guam if Hawaiian doesn’t start Honolulu flying. I’m not sure if that argument has a lot of merit.

Anyway, we’ll see if the DOT changes its mind at all. United does make a good case for SFO, but with the same arguments as last time I’m not sure if DOT will  be convinced. But I like Continental’s creativity here. Let’s see what the DOT thinks of that.

DOT Splits Up Haneda Slots

Published
by
Dan Webb
on May 11, 2010
in American, Continental, Delta, Hawaiian and United
. 1 Comment

Haneda airport has been closed off for long-haul flying for a long time, but that will change later this year when a new runway opens. As part of the new open skies agreement between the US and Japan, American carriers will access to the airport for the first time since 1978. This is big, as Haneda is closer to downtown Tokyo, and as such is viewed as more convenient. The best comparison I can think of (at least in part of the world) is if LaGuardia in New York or Reagan National in Washington were opened for transoceanic flying, if that were possible.

Four slots at the airport were allocated to American carriers, and the DOT was charged with the task of choosing who would get service. Naturally, this is a big deal for the airlines – the prospect of getting access to an attractive  new market where they are shielded from competition is very exciting. But this is also a big decision for the DOT, and I have to think it was a tough choice dealing with such a small number of slots. Plus, the DOT says it had to put its blinders on – the agency said it did not consider the outcomes of the anti-trust immunity applications from American/JAL and United/Continental/ANA.

We had five carriers propose routes – Hawaiian, Delta, American, Continental, and United. I tried to write this carrier-by-carrier, but it just didn’t work out. So here’s a breakdown by city. Karl Swartz over at the Great Circle Mapper made an interesting featured map that shows what was approved (in blue) and what was denied (red):

Honolulu

Two carriers proposed service here. Delta applied for one 747 flight, Hawaiian proposed flying two daily flights from Honolulu, and they received rights for one flight with a 767-300. The airline says they’re going to appeal for the second, but I doubt they’ll get it.

You might be surprised that the DOT selected Honolulu, but it’s actually the largest United States – Japan market. Some airlines argued that Honolulu shouldn’t get any service because it’s a leisure-dominated market, but the DOT argued that the service would provide a boost to Hawaii’s tourism economy.

So why go with Hawaiian, who will inject less capacity? Well, the DOT likes competition. A lot. Hawaiian would be a new entrant into the Hawaii-Japan market, so that seems to be the major motivation for selecting Honolulu and Hawaiian. On a side note, JAL will be starting flights to Honolulu from Haneda later this year as well.

Guam

This one might seem a bit odd, too, but it’s the second-largest Japan-US market. Continental Micronesia applied for one with with a 767-400, and was denied. The DOT acknowledged that there would be economic benefits if the service was approved, but didn’t find it worthwhile. Unlike Hawaiian’s proposal, this would not add any new competition. DOT also believes that using the other slots for mainland service is a better use of them.

Los Angeles/San Francisco/Seattle

From the way I read the filing, it looks like DOT looked at the West Coast as a whole here, so I’ll do the same. Delta applied for a flight from Seattle (A330-300) and Los Angeles (747-400). American applied for Los Angeles (777-200), and not surprisingly, United applied for service from San Francisco. Seattle was denied, and I’m not really shocked. It’s one of the smaller markets that were up for consideration, and with only three slots left to work with DOT was looking for other options, and it ended up going with Delta out of Los Angeles, and that one makes sense – it’s the largest mainland-Japan market. DOT also went with Delta because the flights would be using 747s, introducing most capacity. From a connecting standpoint I think San Francisco opens up more opportunities but I can see DOT’s reasoning here.

Also worth noting is that JAL is cutting SFO-Narita service and moving it over to Haneda later this year.

Detroit

Yep, this was yet another Delta application. The carrier applied for all four slots and wanted to see what would stick. Despite this being the smallest market that DOT was looking at, they gave it to Delta because of connecting opportunities, which makes sense. Even if San Francisco were approved, that wouldn’t be very convenient for passengers in the Eastern half of the country who were flying United, while Delta has an expansive domestic network out of Detroit. (Now that I think of it, why didn’t United try for Chicago service here? I feel if they had they would’ve beat Delta if they had.) Plus Delta using a 747 probably helps, too.

New York

DOT saved New York, the second-largest mainland-Tokyo market, for last. Continental applied for flights out of Newark, and American applied for JFK. Both flights would be flown with 777-200s. The DOT ended up going with American, saying that “should enhance alliance competition by improving the competitive posture of American and oneworld in the U.S.-Asia market as compared to the Skyteam and Star alliances”. (Which is very true – take a look at this graph.) I can see that argument, but I still would have gone with Continental instead. The DOT was looking at connecting opportunities for other cities, and in that department, Continental wins by a long shot.

So when does this all start? Uhm, later this year. The DOT says service will start within 90 days of October 31, but the service is also contingent on the US and Japan signing the final agreement, and the completion of the runway at Haneda. Plus, there’s now a few days left to object to the tentative ruling, though I don’t see much changing at this point.

Photo: Hawaiian’s First A330 Begins Final Assembly

Published
by
Dan Webb
on January 21, 2010
in Hawaiian
. 7 Comments

Hawaiian Airlines currently has an all-Boeing fleet, with 717s used for interisland service and 767-300s utilized for transoceanic flying. But that will change in April when the carrier’s first of three leased A330-200s arrives. The other two aircraft will be placed into service in May and November. The aircraft arriving in April and May will be used for Honolulu-Los Angeles service.

After taking delivery of the leased aircraft, Hawaiian will being accepting deliveries of owned A332s in 2012. Hawaiian has ordered six of these aircraft, and six A350-800s to begin arriving in 2017.

Hawaiian just announced that final assembly of the first A330 has begun, and included in the news release is an image of the aircraft under construction in Toulouse, which is a treat because pictures from inside the Airbus factory are pretty hard to come by.

jan21

I’m looking forward to seeing the inside when it’s finished. Hawaiian says that “a high-resolution LCD touch screen monitor installed in each seatback will allow customers to choose from a wide selection of movies and video programs, audio channels and video games,” which would be a big improvement from its current offerings.

Hawaiian Installs Its First Set of Winglets

Published
by
Dan Webb
on November 5, 2009
in Hawaiian
. 2 Comments

Hawaiian Airlines has completed the first installation of blended winglets on one of its 767s, registered N587HA.

nov5

Photo credit: Damian Balinowski, Hawaiian Airlines

According to a press release, the airline estimates the winglets will save approximately 700-800 gallons of fuel per roundtrip between Hawaii the West Cost. Last quarter, Hawaiian reported a fuel expense of $1.93/gallon, so that’s a savings of $1,351 – $1,544 per roundtrip, which certainly adds up over time. The savings, of course, will be greater if oil keeps on creeping up. The winglets will also enable Hawaiian to carry more cargo on some flights. Continue reading ‘Hawaiian Installs Its First Set of Winglets’

Hawaiian Brings Back Its Original Aircraft

Published
by
Dan Webb
on October 9, 2009
in Hawaiian
. 1 Comment

I’ve written before about how I love it when airlines celebrate their heritage, and Hawaiian really did something special for their 80th anniversary – they found their original aircraft from 1929, restored it, and brought it back to Hawaii!

oct9

Photo courtesy of Hawaiian.

The founder of Inter-Island Airways (the name was changed to Hawaiian in 1941), Stanley C. Kennedy, acquired the Bellanca CH-300 Pacemaker in 1929. He used the aircraft to launch sightseeing tours of Honolulu on October 6 of that year. The aircraft always flew these flights – interisland flights began a little over a month later with Sikorsky S-38 aircraft.

The aircraft was sold in 1933, and eventually ended up with an aviation enthusiast in Oregon, from whom Hawaiian acquired the aircraft.

Kudos to all those involved in the project. Thanks to the hard work of many, Hawaiian reports that the aircraft is now “the only remaining Bellanca Pacemaker in the world that still flies.”

You can find more details here.

Guidances from Hawaiian, Continental

Published
by
Dan Webb
on September 22, 2009
in Continental and Hawaiian
. 0 Comments

Yep, more third quarter guidances. :D

Hawaiian reported that PRASM for the third quarter will be down 15.5-18% year-over-year, which is in line with a previous estimate from July of of a 16-20% decline. CASM ex-fuel is expected to rise 14.5-17%, which is higher than previously predicted.

Continental didn’t have much to add on the PRASM side (though it does give monthly estimates), but it did note that high yield revenue was down 31.2% in July, and about 28% in August, which are both better than the 35.4% decline in June.

Meanwhile, for the next six weeks, the airline is reporting higher advance booked load factors for domestic, Latin, Transatlantic, and Pacific flights.

For costs, Continental is forecasting that CASM ex-fuel and items will be between 7.52 and 7.57 cents, which is better than a previous guidance of 7.59-7.64 cents. Like American, Continental’s fuel cost is a bit higher than previously thought – the airline is now predicting 2.84 cents/mile, compared to an earlier prediction of 2.73 cents.

Hawaiian Steps on Alaska’s Turf with New Oakland Flight

Published
by
Dan Webb
on September 21, 2009
in Alaska and Hawaiian
. 0 Comments

sep20Last week, Hawaiian announced some additional flights, which coincides with some changes in the carrier’s fleet. The airline is currently all-Boeing, but that will change next year when the first of three leased A330s will arrive. The airline has also ordered A330s and A350s from Airbus.

The airline will be doing some additional flying during the summer season. San Diego-Maui will be launched again – Hawaiian did operate route in summer 2008, but did not this year. Meanwhile, the airline said it would be adding an additional flight between Los Angeles and Honolulu with one of the new A330s, though at this point, it is listed as a 767-300 in Hawaiian’s timetable.

But one of the interesting moves is new daily summer service between Oakland and Maui. ATA and Aloha operated this route before they went bust, but this year Alaska announced it would start operating the route four times a week starting in November. The new flight from Hawaiian complements its existing flight from Oakland to Honolulu.

Clearly, Hawaiian thinks there’s more demand in the market, and a daily 767-300 is a lot of capacity compared to Alaska’s four 737-800s a week. It will be interesting to see how this one shakes out, at least for the summer – Hawaiian’s flight starts on June 18 and runs through September 6. I wonder if Alaska will decide if it’s worthwhile to add any additional capacity in this market.

Photo Credit:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/uzvards/ / CC BY-SA 2.0

Looking at the Air Travel Consumer Report

Published
by
Dan Webb
on May 13, 2009
in AirTran, Delta, Hawaiian, Industrywide and Southwest
. 1 Comment

Yesterday, the monthly Air Travel Consumer Report came out, and I noticed a few things. Here they are, in no particular order.

For all the carriers reporting, on-time performance went up compared to a year ago. The on-time percentage for March 2008 was 71.6%, and 78.4% in March 2009.

Delta had the most flights that were stuck on the ground for more than four hours. The Atlanta Journal Constitution reports that a storm in early March was the culprit. But the newspaper also points out that AirTran didn’t have any flights delayed that long from Atlanta.

As Brett Snyder has mentioned in the past, it looks like Hawaiian is still having some issues with mainland flights. For example, the airline’s flights arriving into SFO arrived on time only 45% of the time. When only mainland flights are considered, the airline’s achieved a low on-time percentage of 58% (better than the 50% on-time percentage that Brett reported earlier, but still pretty bad). The number jumps up to 91.5% when the interisland operation is put into the equation, so Hawaiian can still claim it has the best on-time performance in the industry.

In terms of mishandled baggage – here’s a list of all the carriers, ranked by reports of mishandled baggage per 1,000 customers for March 2009. I also list the change in complaints compared to March 2008. All of the carriers improved, and I still think its fair to say that this is one positive side effect of checked luggage fees.

may131

Another interesting thing I noticed was that the report noted that Southwest had updated its 2008 numbers, so I asked them about it. Southwest spokeswoman Paula Berg (one of the best airline PR reps in the business, in my opinion) had an extremely-detailed answer for me less than an hour after I sent her my question (yes, I am looking at you, airlines that don’t seem to respect bloggers :D ):

…all carriers are required to report operating stats to the DOT. As part of an ongoing effort to ensure the accuracy of the information we report, we initiated a review of our 2008 numbers. The findings confirmed the accuracy of the majority of our reporting, but we found some small errors in our baggage numbers – not intentional, of course, but rather the result of human error.

Specifically, there were some coding and formula errors relating to the number of baggage reports taken and the number of Nonrevenue Customers boarded. The correct numbers would not have altered the DOT’s monthly baggage-handling rankings during 2008 except for March (lowering Southwest’s rank from 7th to 8th place) and July (lowering our rank from 5th to 6th place).

OK, that makes sense. Many thanks to Paula for such a prompt and informative reply.

And now…time for me to hop on a bus to get to work! :D

Hawaiian’s March Traffic/Revenue Forecast

Published
by
Dan Webb
on April 9, 2009
in Hawaiian
. 0 Comments

Yesterday, Hawaiian released its March traffic results. I’ve talked about why passengers are up so much more than RPMs and load factor dropped before. April’s results will be more “normal” as Aloha ceased operations at the end of March 2008.

Anyway, the revenue forecast was what stood out for me, and the numbers are actually positive!

Hawaiian also reported that, based on preliminary data, it expects Passenger Revenue per ASM (PRASM) to increase between 3.5% and 5.5% for the three months ended March 31, 2009, compared to the same period in 2008, exceeding the previous expectations the company disclosed during a conference call with investors on February 18, 2009, following the release of the Company’s 2008 financial results.

Deciphering Hawaiian’s February Traffic

Published
by
Dan Webb
on March 9, 2009
in Hawaiian
. 0 Comments

I think I’ve discussed why Hawaiian’s results can look kind of weird in the past, but I wanted to re-visit the topic since the February traffic numbers were just released.

Passengers carried in February 2009 were up 15.1% compared to the same month in 2009, but RPMs are only up 0.9%, and ASMs were up 2.4%, bringing load factor down 1.2 points to 83%. What gives? It’s because of the way load factor is calculated.

For those who don’t know, load factor is RPMs (revenue passenger miles) divided by ASMs (available seat miles). The boost in passengers is mostly coming from the interisland flights, as Hawaiian has picked up some of Aloha’s traffic. These passengers, obviously, generate a much smaller amount of RPMs than those on the long-haul flights. To give an example, San Diego-Honolulu is 2,614 miles while Honolulu-Maui is 101 miles.

I  wish Hawaiian released separate traffic statistics for the interisland and long-haul flying.

These two slides from a recent Hawaiian presentation make the picture a bit clearer:

I found those graphs pretty interesting – looks like essentially Aloha’s service wasn’t replaced on the long-haul flights, and only some of it has been picked up by other carriers in the interisland market.

By the way, you can find that whole slide presentation here. (You can also find there the webcast that goes along with it, though I just skimmed through the slides.)