Something big shifted again in Hawaii travel. This time, it wasn’t over Hawaii airfares or routes. The latest battleground in Hawaii’s airline shake-up starts five hours and 2,700 miles away from the islands. That’s where the Hawaiian airline deal just took an unexpected turn and ignited what may become one of the most consequential of recent turf wars in U.S. aviation.
At the center of this is the appearance of a single route: Seattle to Seoul. But what’s happening here has ripple effects beyond one city pair. What began as a Hawaii-centered combination between Alaska and Hawaiian carriers has now triggered a full-scale international escalation involving aircraft upgrades, long-haul expansion, and a race to capture the most profitable premium passengers flying to Asia and Europe.
And it’s only just getting started.
Hawaiian Dreamliner switch signals bold new direction.
Until now, most of the attention has focused on how Alaska would integrate Hawaiian’s operations across the islands. But beginning September 12, something unexpected happens: Hawaiian’s brand-new Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner will fly the Seattle–Seoul route, replacing the previously announced A330.
That change—quietly slipped into the schedule—marks a major about-face and the first international deployment of Hawaiian’s new flagship aircraft.
Flights HA871 and HA872 will operate four times a week, leaving Seattle in the afternoon and arriving in Seoul the next evening. The return service is timed for late-night departures out of Incheon.
This wasn’t a minor equipment swap. It’s a significant strategic pivot. Alaska has never flown to Seoul. But now, by using Hawaiian’s aircraft and crews, it’s launching an international route from its backyard with a premium widebody it didn’t even order. And it’s doing so with one of the most capable long-haul planes that dominate the international skies.
If anyone doubted Alaska’s global ambitions riding on Hawaiian’s back, this should settle it—permanently.
Delta doesn’t even plan to sit back.
Seattle has long been a brewing point of strategic friction between Alaska and Delta, even more so since their former partnership unraveled. Until now, Delta held a firm grip on the international long-haul market from Sea-Tac. That dominance is now being tested, which appears to be precisely what Alaska intends.
In response to Alaska’s global ambitions using Hawaiian’s aircraft, Delta is preparing its counteroffensive—one that reflects the full weight of its scale. Aviation insider JonNYC reports that Delta plans to open an Airbus A350 pilot base in Seattle, likely by late 2025 or early 2026. That’s no small move. It’s a significant investment that would allow Delta to permanently position its most premium-heavy widebody aircraft in Seattle, rather than rotating them in from other hubs.
This isn’t about convenience—it’s about control. Delta’s A350 flights to and from Seattle require repositioning crews from places like Atlanta, Detroit, or Los Angeles. That means added costs, lost flexibility, and a reduced ability to fully weaponize the A350 in a market Delta clearly values, now more than ever before. A Seattle-based crew changes that overnight.
Delta’s move comes at a moment when its own long-haul strategy is facing outside pressure. With no Boeing widebodies on order and all future growth tied to Airbus, new federal tariffs on foreign-made aircraft could limit future fleet flexibility. That makes the Seattle A350 base not just strategic—it may be Delta’s best bet to stay on the offense.
At the same time, Delta’s aging 767- 300ERs are nearing retirement. Lacking premium economy and falling short of the current Delta product, these aircraft leave the A350 as the most viable way to maintain and grow international reach in the near term.
And the aircraft itself matters. The A350-900 is larger, quieter, has a more extended range, and is significantly more premium-configured than the 787-9s now entering Alaska’s orbit via Hawaiian. In those respects, it’s the superior jet. So while Alaska enters the long-haul ring, Delta is already there, swinging with a heavier punch.
Delta’s not just another competitor. It’s a global behemoth—nearly three times the size of Alaska, even post-Hawaiian. If Alaska plans to take on Delta in a trans-Pacific turf war out of Seattle, it’s punching well above its weight. Is this the little airline that could—or the start of a bold fiasco in the making? Time will tell.
Alaska aims for Europe with Hawaiian aircraft.
In addition to the Seoul flight announcement settling in, Alaska dropped another bombshell for Delta, nonstop service from Seattle to Rome using a Hawaiian Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner. That’s not just a bold expansion—it’s a direct challenge to the legacy carriers who have long dominated Europe-bound routes from the West Coast.
Alaska has never flown to Europe before. The use of Hawaiian’s Dreamliner and crew allows it to leapfrog over years of preparation and instantly join this global club. The Rome route, scheduled four times weekly, will run in the peak summer season with a business-class-heavy configuration and full international service amenities. For now, at least, it will lack the premium economy that virtually all other carriers have adopted.
This should now answer the question for many Hawaii travelers wondering whether Alaska planned to keep these Hawaiian aircraft focused on island routes.
Premium seats reveal what’s really at stake.
If this sounds like a lot of corporate strategy, here’s why it matters for travelers. The jets being used on these routes tell the real story.
The Hawaiian A330s that Alaska uses for Tokyo have a basic 2-cabin layout with 18 lie-flat seats and no premium economy section. On the other hand, the new Dreamliner headed to Rome features 34 lie-flat suites.
Meanwhile, Delta’s A350s offer up to 40 DeltaOne suites and 48 premium economy seats—more than double the number of high-revenue passengers compared to the 787.
This arms race isn’t about more seats. It’s about better seats. Premium leisure travelers—those paying extra for lie-flat comfort or premium economy—are the new target market. And the Pacific Rim just became ground zero for that fight.
Alaska, meanwhile, may have the upper hand, at least for now. Hawaiian’s Dreamliners and internationally trained crews provide instant access to long-haul markets without waiting years for aircraft delivery slots. While Delta has scale, Alaska suddenly has speed, which could make all the difference in the early stages of this turf war.
What this means for Hawaii.
That raises a few uncomfortable questions: Are Hawaii routes about to lose more widebody service? Is Hawaii being strategically deprioritized in favor of international growth? Could Honolulu lose future long-haul options while Dreamliners fly from Seattle to Europe?
The answer isn’t yet clear, but it’s evident that Alaska’s new strategy isn’t “Hawaii-first”.” It’s globally focused—and that’s a very different playbook from what either Alaska or Hawaiian once followed.
A flashpoint in Seattle, fueled by a Hawaii deal.
The irony in all of this is hard to miss. A deal supposedly about Hawaii is now reshaping trans-Pacific and trans-Atlantic flying from Seattle. Routes that Hawaiian never touched—and Alaska never had the planes for—are now part of a new, hybrid global airline strategy. And the first actual contest isn’t over Maui or Oahu. It’s playing out 3,000 miles away at Sea-Tac.
Delta, for its part, seems ready to draw a line. The new A350 pilot base is just one signal of its intent to fight back.
Meanwhile, the next question is: where does this leave Hawaiian’s original routes? And what will it take for Hawaii travelers to feel like they’re still part of the plan?
Final thoughts.
This isn’t a merger that’s quietly settling into place. It’s a strategic pivot with ripple effects far beyond Hawaii. And for now, all eyes should be on Seattle. That’s where the red-hot turf war just broke out.
Do you think Hawaii routes are being left behind in this global expansion? Let us know what you think.
Get Breaking Hawaii Travel News
Delta will win this battle if it is a profitable route, or routes. They have the coffers to endure a battle.
Hawaiian A330s do have ‘premium economy’ – but what’s in a name?
They have nice ‘thing’ between the ‘lie flat’ cabin and main cabin – a separate cabin with 2 rows of larger seats with extra privileges.
They are in a 2-4-2 formation — and the twos are a single row , making them more private than most of their type.
They also have these seat in the front of the main cabin.
Aloha,
Mahalo for all the info and analysis. Sadly, it does look like Hawai’i is already in Alaska’s rear view mirror. Thankfully I don’t fly UAL (Your other article on the SFO flight) much, but have loved flying Hawaiian for many years and especially loved when flying to JFK or BOS. Can’t help but wonder what’s going to happen to those routes???
Thank you for continuing to do a great job on keeping us up to date!
Right out of the gate, Alaska is making far better use of HA assets, flying not one, but two HA A330’s SEA-ANC starting this coming week. This will be a gold mine for Alaska Airlines Cargo and something AS has needed for years.
Moreover, it gives Alaska more efficient seasonal use of the A330’s, flying SEA-ANC in the peak summer, and SEA-HNL in the peak winter.
Down the line, though, when they are all back in service from the engine repairs, the A321 will be the backbone of HA’s Hawaii-mainland service.
This is a very well thought out and well written article. Mahalo for publishing it.
As a Seattle resident who worked quite a bit on Oahu, I find this a very exciting time, filled with both potential and significant risk for AS/HA. Reading other sites about AS, many commenters felt that AS should deploy 787s on Asian routes and it seems they will start with Seoul. I am not sure how much premium demand there will be to Rome. SEA-based travelers are funny that way–ask DL why they dropped DeltaOne service between SEA and BOS/JFK. Will they pony up for longer TATL flights? Only time will tell.
Europe nonstops to SEA will be good for Hawaii eventually, offering slightly shorter routes from Europe and good connections. If there is good demand, maybe there will be nonstops from Europe to HI eventually but not for a while.
Flying to Rome doesn’t make much sense if you’re hoping to fill biz class seats as Milan is the biz car and close to France Switzerland and tourist sites that are way more friendly then Rome. Mosf of 30k ppl flying the route are budget tourists which given EUR is up like 15% ytd they would put off that trip.
What would make more sense would be to fly from Europe to hnl which maybe they will do as a seasonal service in the winter.
I fully appreciated your newsletters. I am retired. I worked at Continental Airlines in the late 70’s to 85′ at Continental Airlines; remember when Bob Six owned it. The DC-10 LAX-HNL was premium service to Hawaii.Since Degregulation in the 80’s, the entire industry changed and continues to change never for benefit of passengers albiet fares, meals, services and all else. I’m in Colorado genreally take United non stop Den-HNL. 2 years ago I got my Hawaiin Miles cc looking forward to experiencing HA flt rt from one of the many westcoast cities and have 150K miles on my cc. Now I am scrambling to find such flt on HA to use my miles and experience the NEO in Sep before Alaska resdistribute all the Neos. I have been around the industry in many forms many years so I understand the business. But, I agree, no one wants to take or enjoys a 737, 767 5-7 hours enroute to Hawaii at higher fares, add in the new climate fee and we visitors dread the trekadded expense
Let’s be honest…..AS saved HA. Without the merger, it HA would have gone BK and left Hawaii with UA and SWA. AS wouldn’t have bought HA without the 787s and a back plan to base them in SEA for a battle with Delta. I love HA and sure hope that AS honors it promise to keep the traditional island flavor alive (unlike what it did to Virgin – I do think it will…..as the special flavor of Hawaiian will sell seats over UA and AA. ) AS/HA still has 24 330s and certainly will continue to use the majority out of Hawaii. As for the 787s, they closed the deal with AS and saved HA.
So were the 787 orders a brilliant move on HA’s part? Revisionism or reality, if the 787s were a strategic Hail Mary to insure HA had an asset to be a continue going concern during an acquisition it worked. Seems as if HA were really interested at going at it alone, they would of sought ways of rationalizing and gaining a larger fleet of A321s more quickly by making a trade in deal with Airbus for their overly generous cadre of A330s… and skipped the complexity of two wide-body fleets for such a small airline. Especially considering the onslaught of narrow-body competition to the islands going all the way back to the introduction of the 737-ETOPs to the islands back prior to 2008 and Alaska launching service there. Did leadership realize with the demise of the all narrow-body Aloha, this business model could not succeed in the islands against the lower cost, economies of scale Mainland ops, or was HA just caught between a rock and hard place no matter what they did?
Weird. The article makes it sound like Hawaiian’s in general, and Hawaiian employees, aren’t supposed to be too excited about new destinations such as Rome on their own medal.
Knowing airline employees and passengers as I do, I know this just is not the case.
Good day~ If anyone is alarmed on the strategic moves that Alska is making with Their equipment, it is how the airline game is played. Deploy your assets where they make money, be competitive and take care of your customers as best you can. By now I would have hoped that each move being made by AS was not another preditable action to gasp at!
I do beg to differ on the B787 v A350. Having flown them each one way last to month to London and back on Virgin Atlantic, the B787, even though is an older airframe, for me is more comfortable, pleasing and I arrive in a better rested state (either direction). And that is in regards to the overall atmosphere of the aircraft, not seeting configurations. The B787 is a true composite aircraft whereas the A350 is a hybrid. Also, it is a tad smaller and I prefer that to being on some mega ship. Cheers
Hawaii, our home has always been strategic, it is one of the most strategic locations on the planet for military, commerce & culture. We speak multiple languages and with our multi-ethnicity culture, we easily integrate with other nations and cultures. When others squabble about minor issues we ignore the noise and take giant steps forward with Aloha & an unshakeable Ohana
The move with Hawaiian airlines in acquiring the Boeing Dreamliner is strategic, significant and shows the forward insight of the Hawaiian leadership. Alaska is akami & knows how to logistically makes things work & control costs=greater profitability. With the Hawaiian Strategics and Alaskan Logistics, our combined profitability is a win-win for all.
This is not about money but market conquest (the money will follow) and the current moves on the chess board of travel will help us to do it with Aloha.
Everyone wants to come to Hawaii, now we get to bring Hawaii to them (& back) in a bigger, stronger way for all.
I guess the alternative would have been for Hawaiian to not be acquired by Alaska and then go out of business.
This merger is a net positive for both parties. Hawaiian employees keep their jobs and Alaska has the opportunity to expand their presence in a way that strengthens both airlines.
Honestly, there’s no pleasing some people.
Not all HA employees retained their jobs. Many did not want to relocate to Seattle. If not, they were laid off.
The vast majority of HA employees are keeping their jobs. Some layoffs, while unfortunate are a part of any merger.
Would you have been happier with ALL HA employees being laid off?
Just me or my nativity that this is just business being business. If you require another company, use his resources to strengthen the parent company.
This often will happen at the expense of your existing clientele. Karr will tell if this model will actually work for the new joint company airlines or it will actually be the downfall.
This truly will affect how everyone uses and goes to Hawaii, but everything always is changing. .
Ask the people who used to work and fly on Virgin America. Absorption of HA continues with new priorities.
If you want a glimpse of what the future holds for Hawaiian Air with respect to the Alaskan acquistion go to SFO. Hawaiian was moved from a pleasant, easily accessible, expansive location in the International Terminal to a space about 1/8th its former size squeezed into a small space with few service agents and employees next to a large, expansive Alaskan presence brimming with employees and agents. Eventually all of Hawaiian Air and its functions will be absorbed by Alaskan, despite Alaskan’s protestations otherwise.
“Alaska” Airlines, not Alaskan.
Thanks.
Alaskan drives me crazy.
@Jim–I don’t think the repositioning of HA at SFO in any way predicts the future of HA. If AS and HA are to operate together and have any degree of connectivity between them, they need to be physically near one another. AS is now in T1 at SFO, which is a long distance from the international terminal. Furthermore, I don’t know if T1 and the international terminal connect airside, i.e., one might have to go through security again to connect. That wouldn’t work well for connections.
As for HA having a smaller check-in area than AS, terminal planning at such a busy airport happens years in advance. Without that planning, there are space constraints. Also, I am sure AS has a lot more flights than HA from SFO. None of this is a “diss” of HA.