mike_plat

I think it was a miscalculation on DL's part to remove the A330 from service this summer on SFO-NRT. SFO is UL's largest west coast hub, and the A330 was a potent weapon DL had against anything UL has. This levels the playing field in a way that the spreadsheet crankers in ATL won't be able to understand except in hindsight. I am already looking at ANA and UL for my Asia flights going forward.

pbarnette

I think this pretty much sums it up. I genuinely struggle to see what has really changed. Much of the 763 service serves city pairs that don't have clearly superior options. You want to fly PDX-NRT? Then either choose non-stop or connect. You want to fly ATL-CPH? Then either choose non-stop or connect. Even for those city pairs where there are better options, it isn't clear that DL can't still compete on price or simply serve the capacity that the others don't have room for.

Frankly, I don't think the issue is that some overstate the quality of the 763 product, but that some overstate the quality of the A330 product. You want to fly SFO-NRT? You have 3 different options and, all else being equal, it isn't clear one would, hands-down, choose a DL A330 over any of the other options. You want to fly SEA-ZRH? You have several options and I struggle to see how the A330 rises above the pack.

If one genuinely cares as much about service, cleanliness, food, IFE, and seating (to the exclusion of cost or schedule) as some like to pretend to, then there were always better options than NW or DL (at least using the criteria and quality assessments from many here). One would have never been flying SEA-SIN on NW in the first place, if the difference were as dramatic as some want to make it seem.


It isn't actually true that most carriers use a 2-1-2 configuration on the 767, but don't let facts get in the way of a rant.

moondog

If the OP was "PDX based," he wouldn't have posted this yesterday. Therefore, I have to assume that he's thinking about LAX or SFO, from which there are much better options.

motytrah

Sure, if you include domestic 2-2-2 recliner configurations then it's would be the case. You can't just look at raw seat guru numbers, you need to actually look at how many 2-2-2 recliner configs are international.

I did 2-1-2 on CO and that was okay at best. 2-2-2 is out of step with the BE service standard DL is trying to claim it lives up to and is a downgrade for people used to have PMNW metal on a route.

Dawgfan6291

DL only had 777s on ATL-PVG-ATL. No way could a 763 make that.


Also
SEA-PEK
SEA-KIX
PDX-NRT
SFO-NRT
NRT-PVG
NRT-GUM
NRT-PEK will all see the 763 this year but please note, Delta will be adding PTVs/AVOD nose to tail and Lie-flat seats(and winglets) to all of the 763 fleet, will be done by 2013.

3Cforme

2-2-2 in BE isn't a surprise for anyone who looks at a seat map, be it on Delta.com or SeatGuru. Since objective information - pitch, width, style - is readily available for seating the argument for a subjective interpretation 'BE service standard' is weakened.

As for being worse than NW metal, that depends. The 767-300ER has every at-seat amenity offered by the 747-400, an aircraft which NW brought into the combined fleet with no coach AVOD or power, nor public plans for either.

The A330s are nicer and newer than the 767-300ERs, but it's a bit spurious to suggest all routes would have retained A330-200 service in the travel downturn. As pbarnette notes, the option could well be 767 or no non-stop service. (Don't forget that NW parked or sold off some relatively young Airbus narrowbodies in bankruptcy, so relative fuel efficiency may not be enough to justify operation of every aircraft. NW - absent Delta - might well have parked an A330 rather than operating PDX-NRT.) If somebody headed to NRT wants to connect at LAX or SEA rather than take a non-stop from PDX or SFO, go for it - though that's not a choice I would make.

On the other hand it's appropriate to acknowledge Delta's efforts to build the Asian network with JFK-NRT; DTW-ICN and DTW-HKG with 777s, and SEA-KIX, SEA-PEK - routes NW couldn't justify with its A330/744 fleet.

pbarnette

Among the US carriers, UA, AA, & DL all have a 2-2-2 config for international planes. Aeroflot, BA, JL, Austrian, LOT, & LAN are also 2-2-2. Those carriers constitute far, far more than half of all currently operating international 767s. The only carrier with international 767 fleets of any size that are 2-1-2 (or better) are AC and CO, and both combined would still lag either DL or AA in terms of fleet. Many of the rest of the 767s in service are with charter carriers or, like the QF fleet, feature domestic-F style pitch.

I seriously doubt that there are even 100 767s operating with a J cabin that features 2-1-2 seating and an international J seat.

socrates

Wow this is an interesting post....NWA is no more, hasn't been for quite sometime (Remember the DL folks have been in charge now for over 18 months)

NWA couldn't justify those routes? Seems to me many of them were only stopped as a result of recent demand changes (heck I still have my Inaugural gift for attending the launch party for DTW-PEK way back in the mid 90's)...now that demand is coming back DL is only reinstating the routes

stephem

I am not sure I understand this, we're talking about business class and you seem to be talking about economy cabins. First you have the seat difference- I am not saying the NW330 seat is great, but it's tolerable, and it's certainly a better "at seat" experience than the DL767 seat.

The real issue I have with these threads is the way people try to defend DL, and they often just point at the former NW, as if that will somehow justify why DL cannot compete with CX, SQ or even (747) UA and AC and some KE. To be clear, I am not trying to say NW was way better. For years prior to the DL integration, I was vocal that NW needed to start thinking about the next best thing b/c angle flat was on its way out as a competitive premium product. Whether business class in the 767 is "worse" or "far worse" from the experience in the 330s is only a small portion of the discussion here. The reality is that the 767 isn't competitive with west coast transpacs on other carriers that charge about the same fares.

To the statements that a direct flight on a 767 is always better than a one stop, well yes and no, and when you put some context around the actual flights and take this out of a hypothetical then I am not so sure.

The comments here all assume that all flyers are stopping in Tokyo, and while the OP seems to fit that category, many people are going to cities other than Tokyo and so that logic that the 767 is the best option across the pacific weakens. If you are headed to HKG, ICN, BKK or SIN, DL wont get you there nonstop and so whatever appeal a nonstop on a 767 may have gets lost. Additionally, while I agree that some people do not like connections, if you have one of those jobs that requires you to surgically insert yourself half-way round the world and sound alive (and you actually need sleep to do that) then a 2 hour flight up or down the west coast is a small front end cost to pay as compared to going a day early to "recover" from a sub-prime seat experience.

Denolloyd

Perhaps you missed this:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Denolloyd

Forgive me, I have no idea where I got PDX from.

Regardless, my point still remains. DL has more nonstop flights to international destinations than any other US based carrier. Yes, 763's with recliners make up a large percentage of these flights, however I (and a lot of others) would rather a nonstop on a 763 than a connection on an 330.

I used to fly JFK-OTP frequently on a 763 with recliners. It was a fantastic option for getting to Bucharest. Now I have to connect in either CDG or AMS. Give me the 763 with recliners any day. Admittedly, it's not the best product, however good enough for me.



Cheers

domyoji

I'll believe it when I see it. They have been talking about upgrading the 763s to full AVOD and Lie-flats for years, but kept on postponing it because of financial problems.

Also, my upcoming trip was going to be NRT-PDX with a connection to GEG or NRT-SEA-GEG. I was trying to avoid PDX, because they were running a 763 (actually a couple of the tickets on delta's site said 764s), by just going SEA, but they wouldnt let me get RT in and out of SEA. Ended up settling for a A330 to SFO with a connection to SLC-GEG on a CRJ-900, for the inbound and GEG-SEA-NRT on a A330 out.

Its a lot longer, but at least I am getting a lot of miles off it...

Anyone have suggestions for a 4 hour layover in SFO? First time going there.

TheMoose

These are also routes that DL couldn't justify with its meager 777 fleet and old 763 fleet. These routes were only possible with the merger. They were able to take NW's 32 A330s (considerably more than the 777s DL had pre-merger) and redeploy them on routes to Europe. This left them with "extra" 777s to deploy on the former NW Asia network, something that NW worked at for years to build up and DL is simply taking advantage of. Nothing wrong with that as that's what you do in a merger. But...

...if you're going to give credit, give credit where credit is due. Anything regarding the "Asian network" is squarely a reflection of NW's efforts. Just as I wouldn't suggest the former NW take credit for the "European/African network" that is to be flown by A330s, you shouldn't do the same for the Asia routes, nor for route authorities that NW had pre-merger, such as JFK-NRT, SEA-KIX, SEA-PEK.

mnredfox

Not a DL faithful, but I actually will say they are not that bad and tolerable.

+1, seats are outdated and IFE is a joke. Screens are terribly small, but again the seat is tolerable.

Interesting point. I agree with you somewhat. I think I'd give the A330 the thumbs up over the 763, but will agree that it isn't that significant. I'd choose A330 over 767 anyway, but wouldn't be absolutely upset to fly the 767.

+1, as previously stated.

johnincolumbus

Thanks for the contribution, Mark.

tgrazini

Also, on another positive note Delta is upgrading the PDX-AMS route this summer to the A330. ^