Originally Posted by
Jeff767
The A330-900 will solve that issue.
thats pretty unlikely. the 339 wont have that much of a range bump over the 332.
A 251t 339 might be able to do it over a Delta 332 but I don't believe the first 10 or so 339s for Delta (at least) will be 251t. They will come as 242t frames.
Originally Posted by
readywhenyouare
Again, let's see the performance charts. But I'll play along and say that it won't have any issues. The A330neo name is a bit deceiving. It's not just a simple engine upgrade and aero tweaks like the A320neo. The airframe is bigger and holds considerably more passengers. 320+ passengers is way too much for such a thin market. The A330-900 is better suited for something like LAX-ICN or DTW-AMS. It's an airplane for hub-hub operations.
Do you ever look anything up before posting? serious question.
Delta's 339s will have 12 less seats than the current Delta 333 (281 v 306)
More importantly, yes the 330N vs 330C is pretty much engines and aero upgrades. The fuselage length and width are staying the same size.
Originally Posted by
pbarnette
I would think his point is that Denver and Sacramento, for example, already have service to both LAX and SEA, so it isn't clear SLC wouldn't just steal connecting traffic from those hubs. I think it is a valid question to ask what cities would be served via SLC that aren't via LAX or SEA and what kind of volume they might bring.
The reason Delta would add something like SLC-ICN is to free up more seats in SEA and/or LAX for local pax.