Paris flight on Delta presents a dilemma

There's no doubt that flying nonstop to Europe (or anywhere for that matter) is a huge travel benefit compared with the prospect of making a connection in any busy East Coast airport, whether New York, Philadelphia, Washington, Charlotte, N.C., or Atlanta.

As Pittsburgh-based fliers have learned all too well in recent years, more journeys now require making a connection at another airport, often entailing an extra overnight in route, lost luggage, limited schedules and missed flights.

That reality is especially evident during the return of an international journey, where clearing customs at big international hubs such as JFK or Philadelphia and catching the last flight to Pittsburgh can be particularly problematic.

Local travelers had it good during the decades Pittsburgh International was a vibrant hub, with British Airways offering service to London in the '80s and then U.S. Airways to London, Frankfurt and Paris in the 1990s, all fed by a stream of passengers on flights from elsewhere.

But that international ease ended for Pittsburgh in 2004, as it has for many other mid-sized markets since.

So it was with great expectation when a local consortium of business-oriented interests headed by the Allegheny Conference on Community Development had brokered a deal with Delta Airlines for a two-year test to see how a regular nonstop flight to Paris would be received by area travelers.

Under the arrangement, Delta agreed to provide a 170-passenger Boeing 757-200 (155 economy/15 premium seats) to fly round trip between Pittsburgh International and Charles de Gaulle Airport, with five departures each week in the four busy summer months, and four departures per week the other eight months.

To mitigate Delta's financial risks, the conference agreed to guarantee the airline up to $5 million the first year, and $4 million the second year, should flight revenues fail to reach projections, which were based on ticket prices at the time ($1,164 round trip) and the average load factor of Delta's trans-Atlantic service (71 percent of available seats sold).

The conference promised to provide half of the guarantee, and the other half to come from a grant from state economic development funds. In addition, the Allegheny County Airport Authority agreed to spend $600,000 over two years to promote the flight.

While economists may question the wisdom of using public funds to subsidize commercial airline operations in this way, it is clear that this flight would not have happened without it.

So after its first year, how has Delta 188/189 fared? There are several measures.

The numbers

According to figures provided by the Allegheny Conference, during its first eight months of operation (four months of five flights per week and four months of four flights per week) the average load factor -- the number of seats sold -- was 68 percent, or about 115.6 of the plane's 170 seats sold per flight, which is slightly below projections.

The U.S. Department of Transportation figures an average of 407 passengers depart Pittsburgh International each day for destinations in Europe, the Middle East, India or Africa, so on that scale, the Delta Paris flight is capturing about 23 percent of that traffic.

However, while good for travelers, the average ticket price for the flight from Pittsburgh to Paris was down last summer by 31.6 percent to $826 round trip, $338 less than the deal's benchmark fare.

Ken Zapinski, the conference's senior vice president for transportation and infrastructure, said the shortfall for the flight's first 12 months "should be large enough to trigger the full $5 million guarantee payment."

Dividing that amount over the 226 Pittsburgh/Paris round-trip flights Delta operated over the year, that guarantee works out to an average of $22,124 per flight, or based on reported capacity, about $191 per paying passenger.

But put that in perspective of aviation economics. With price of jet fuel about $2 a gallon and the 757 carrying 11,486 gallons fully loaded, that stipend doesn't even pay to fill the tanks. Also remember that $191 represents a little over half of the difference in average fares between the summer of 2009 and 2008.

And although airfares are higher this summer, a round-trip ticket on a 30-day advance purchase basis is quoted at $991, that is still $173 below the deal's benchmark rate, so the subsidy is likely to continue.

Ever wonder why it is so difficult for airlines to make money?

At any rate, to increase average capacity both by getting more of Pittsburgh's overseas traffic and increasing awareness elsewhere of the advantages of making international connections through Pittsburgh, the local consortium is running limited advertising and promotional efforts in selected other cities.

With rising base fares (and gains by the dollar against the euro encouraging more travel to Europe), Mr. Zapinski hopes the flight's financial picture will improve during the deal's second year. But if Delta doesn't see the market support to operate the Paris flight without the subsidy, the flight is unlikely to continue past June 2011. And if that happens, it's hard to see another carrier starting international service here, he said.

The flight experience

It is clear the nonstop Paris flight has been well-received by the business community, and its connections with Air France also offer good routes to other destinations around Europe and farther. The flight offers the fastest route to several destinations in India. Stephen Tritch, chairman of Westinghouse Electric says, "We've used the flight to travel to destinations from Delhi to Zurich to Stockholm."

Certainly the eastbound leg of the journey is conveniently scheduled, a 6:20 p.m. departure from Pittsburgh that arrives at Charles de Gaulle Airport in Paris at 8:20 the following morning, after an 8-hour flight.

The westbound return flight's scheduled departure from Paris is at 11:10 a.m., touching down at Pittsburgh International at 2:15 p.m., a 9-hour-and-5-minute journey. That's an hour and a half faster each way than any routing that involves a connection.

But the real test is in the flight experience itself.

My wife and I sampled Delta 188 in November on a trip to Barcelona. Delta's flight 188 would get us to Paris in time for a two-hour connection to an Air France flight that would get us to Barcelona by noon. Unfortunately, because Delta didn't offer a flight on our preferred departure date, we decided to go a day earlier, giving ourselves an extra 24 hours to enjoy Barcelona, not a big problem.

The return trip was less convenient. The only flight from Barcelona that could get us to Paris in time to connect with Delta 189 to Pittsburgh meant leaving for the airport at 3:30 a.m. On the other hand, Delta also offered another two-flight option through JFK that departed Barcelona four hours later and would get us home to Pittsburgh International at 4 p.m., two hours later than the return through Paris. Since the airfare was the same either way, we chose to get a bit more sleep that morning and come back via New York City.

That strategy also provided a chance to compare the two Delta trans-Atlantic experiences, a Boeing 757-200 going over and a wide-body Boeing 767-400 coming back.

Both flights took off and landed roughly on schedule. The cabin and meal service on both were similar these days. The entertainment offerings were diverting, although the individual seat back screens on the 767 were far better than the single, overhead screen every few rows on the 757.

The biggest difference can be summed in two words: cabin size.

The Pittsburgh-Paris 757-200 carries 170 passengers and is a single aisle plane with two seats on either side in premium class and three seats on either side in economy class.

The Paris-NYC 767-400 holds 203 passengers (28 premium, 175 economy) with two aisles and configured six across in premium (2,2,2) and seven across in economy (2,3,2).

Even though both flights were close to full and I wound up with a window seat on both, my experience was significantly different.

For the eight hours to Paris, I felt cramped in a tight space. The curve of the cabin wall confined me, and because there wasn't enough room in the overhead compartment to fit my pack, it was under the seat in front of me, reducing my already minimal legroom. The single aisle made it difficult to walk around, especially during meal service. There was a wait to use one of the two toilets. One couple had an infant, and I kept wondering how they could find a place to change a diaper.

On the 767, the bigger cabin meant my widow seat was less constrained and being only one seat away from the aisle, it was easier to get up and walk around. Even though my carry-on was fuller on the return, it fit easily in the overhead. So even though my seat was the same size, it felt bigger on the return, and on a long plane flight, that is a primary factor.

Of course, transitioning through JFK is hardly ever a pleasure, but other than several long lines and a long walk between flights, the connection there went smoothly, at least as smoothly as I imagine the connection in Paris might have gone.

In summation, local travelers should hope this Pittsburgh/Paris connection continues to gain acceptance during its second year, but a number of factors must work out if the flight is to continue once the risk guarantee ends in June 2011.

The percentage of trans-Atlantic-bound Pittsburgh passengers must increase, as must the number of other travelers finding this direct flight a convenience, whether for business or pleasure. It would also be helpful if the general economy improved.

Certainly Delta finding a 767 to fly the route would make for a more comfortable experience, as well as provide 30 extra seats to sell. Having a daily departure would simplify passenger scheduling and help make the direct option more widely known.

But the most significant factor will be the ticket price, a highly complicated factor that seems beyond anyone's ability to control or even predict.

Quite simply, for this flight to succeed, ticket prices have to rise. Even if every seat on a 200-passenger plane were filled five days a week, coming in $338 below forecasted revenues on each seat is not a long-term prescription for success.

In that eventuality, the cost of a few extra hours of inconvenience is difficult to justify by any economic argument.