Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > Delta Air Lines | SkyMiles
Reload this Page >

Delta will send an RFP for 744/767 replacements 'by the end of the month'

Delta will send an RFP for 744/767 replacements 'by the end of the month'

Old Mar 12, 2014, 2:20 pm
  #16  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Orlando, FL Area
Programs: Delta SkySponge ExtraAbsorbent, SPG Gold
Posts: 29,988
Originally Posted by mmichael453
RA's stated widebody requirements:

275 seats
5000-5500 NM range

One assumes that he also wants better TCO and fuel economy than the A330s he's got now. Oddly the two requirements above are almost exactly an A330 in present Delta configuration (ie the 3L3s). His requirements are slightly larger and with slightly less range than the 76L.
Anderson just sounds uninformed with his statement. He referred to the A330 as a small widebody. Huh? The A330 has more seats than Delta's 777's!

So are the 788's currently on order at risk of being canceled? It seems ridiculous to replace a 767 with an A330 or A350 with both of those aircraft being a lot larger. Capacity discipline...yeah, ok.
readywhenyouare is offline  
Old Mar 12, 2014, 2:24 pm
  #17  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: ATL Concourse E Skyclub
Programs: DL PM, IHG, Hilton, Starwood
Posts: 199
Also, it just occurred to me: Is Delta already on course for more or less all Domestic routes being serviced by narrowbodies? That is except JFK<->the west coast? Once the domestic 767s are gone, then what? Not that the domestic 767s are such a joy to fly on, but at least they've got a whole lot less middle seats.

Originally Posted by readywhenyouare
Anderson just sounds uninformed with his statement. He referred to the A330 as a small widebody. Huh? The A330 has more seats than Delta's 777's!
Maybe he's somehow only thinking of the 3L2s?
mmichael453 is offline  
Old Mar 12, 2014, 2:50 pm
  #18  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Washington, D.C.
Programs: UA Premier 1K: PlAAtinum; DL SM, MM; Marriott Gold; CO Plat Emeritus; NW Plat Emeritus
Posts: 4,776
Originally Posted by readywhenyouare
Anderson just sounds uninformed with his statement. He referred to the A330 as a small widebody. Huh? The A330 has more seats than Delta's 777's!
MTOW of a 772 is 656,000 lbs vs. 534,000 for an A333.
Alpha Golf is offline  
Old Mar 12, 2014, 2:58 pm
  #19  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Orlando, FL Area
Programs: Delta SkySponge ExtraAbsorbent, SPG Gold
Posts: 29,988
Originally Posted by Alpha Golf
MTOW of a 772 is 656,000 lbs vs. 534,000 for an A333.
Either way the A330 is not a small widebody. A 767 would be my definition of a small widebody. If DL wants proven/old technology then why not order som new 767's?
readywhenyouare is offline  
Old Mar 12, 2014, 3:01 pm
  #20  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: SEA
Programs: AS 75k
Posts: 922
Originally Posted by readywhenyouare
Anderson doesn't want the 777X because it is an "experimental airplane?

How is the 777X any more experimental than an A330NEO? At least we know a 777X will be built. There has been no commitment to an A330NEO.

And how are they considering the 788 when they already have 20 on order?

Of course he also thinks the 787 and A350 are now "well down the road". What a joke. The A350 is not even in revenue service yet.
There's no consistency in RA's comments, and no consistency either with what the two makers are offering, or with what DL has done in the past. He wants a 275 seat plane with a 5500 mile range to replace the 275 seat plane with a 5500 mile range they're already flying, then goes on to list a bunch of planes with 7000-9000 mile ranges of varying sizes. The 333NEO is going to be a heavy long range plane that would need to underfly its range to fit his niche. The only planes that make sense size/range wise are the current 333 (which DL just ordered 10 of) or new 763ERs. Boeing would probable give DL a good deal on 763ERs if they asked nice, and Airbus is obviously willing to sell 333s for cheap to bridge the gap to the A350-8. Obviously not the most fuel efficient option, but neither Boeing nor Airbus is going to make a plane of the 763ER specs because the airlines that actually buy new airplanes (middle east and Asian carriers in particular) want longer ranges.

The 757 was ended somewhat because it served a niche that was not particularly viable, with the lower end being covered by the 739/A321 and the upper end covered by 767/A330 (and later the 787), and nobody was ordering them (including DL). Boeing offered the 787-3 which was essentially a twin aisle 753 and exactly nobody wanted it.

Until DL is willing to buy "experimental" planes and/or be a launch customer with a big order, they're not going to have any say in the configuration of new airplanes and they'll just have to underfly the widebodies.
WestSideBilly is offline  
Old Mar 12, 2014, 3:11 pm
  #21  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: SEA
Programs: AS 75k
Posts: 922
Originally Posted by mmichael453
Also, it just occurred to me: Is Delta already on course for more or less all Domestic routes being serviced by narrowbodies? That is except JFK<->the west coast? Once the domestic 767s are gone, then what? Not that the domestic 767s are such a joy to fly on, but at least they've got a whole lot less middle seats.
Not really sure they have a choice unless they buy new 763s. Above the 739ER/A321 (and ignoring the 763), the next biggest plane is the 788, and the next longest range is the 772. Can't see either of those being used domestically on a regular basis. The 787-3 would have been a good domestic plane (it was designed for Japan, but would have been a good option for busy/interhub routes).
WestSideBilly is offline  
Old Mar 12, 2014, 3:19 pm
  #22  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: KUL/TPA/OTP
Programs: UA1k, DL
Posts: 3,138
Wirelessly posted (iPhone 3G: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 7_0_6 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/537.51.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/7.0 Mobile/11B651 Safari/9537.53)

Originally Posted by readywhenyouare
Originally Posted by mmichael453
RA's stated widebody requirements:

275 seats
5000-5500 NM range

One assumes that he also wants better TCO and fuel economy than the A330s he's got now. Oddly the two requirements above are almost exactly an A330 in present Delta configuration (ie the 3L3s). His requirements are slightly larger and with slightly less range than the 76L.
Anderson just sounds uninformed with his statement. He referred to the A330 as a small widebody. Huh? The A330 has more seats than Delta's 777's!

So are the 788's currently on order at risk of being canceled? It seems ridiculous to replace a 767 with an A330 or A350 with both of those aircraft being a lot larger. Capacity discipline...yeah, ok.
Number of seats does not define aircraft size. By your definition, the Singapore a345's were smaller aircraft than DL MD80's.
Denolloyd is offline  
Old Mar 12, 2014, 3:20 pm
  #23  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Australia
Programs: SQ & QF
Posts: 1,302
Originally Posted by WestSideBilly
Boeing offered the 787-3 which was essentially a twin aisle 753 and exactly nobody wanted it.
The 787-3 was basically a 787-8 with different wings. It was the same size.
FN-GM is offline  
Old Mar 12, 2014, 3:23 pm
  #24  
Original Member and FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Kansas City, MO, USA
Programs: DL PM/MM, AA ExPlat, Hyatt Glob, HH Dia, National ECE, Hertz PC
Posts: 16,577
Aviation Week is about as reliable a source as it comes to these sorts of things, but some of RA's comments are head-scratchers, I really question if some of the quotes are used out of context, I'd love to see the full transcript of this interview.
Originally Posted by mmichael453
Is Delta already on course for more or less all Domestic routes being serviced by narrowbodies? That is except JFK<->the west coast?
Yes, as RA said "aircraft that underfly their range are uneconomical." Any widebody is going to be significantly undreflying its range on a domestic route. Although gas prices spiked in the past, what we've seen over the past three years is an unprecedented level of sustained fuel prices that make operating widebodies on domestic routes unaffordable. Even the Business Elite routes will likely follow the lead set by AA and their new A321's by using a dedicated fleet of narrowbodies at some point.
Beckles is offline  
Old Mar 12, 2014, 3:24 pm
  #25  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: KUL/TPA/OTP
Programs: UA1k, DL
Posts: 3,138
Wirelessly posted (iPhone 3G: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 7_0_6 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/537.51.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/7.0 Mobile/11B651 Safari/9537.53)

Originally Posted by readywhenyouare
Originally Posted by Alpha Golf
MTOW of a 772 is 656,000 lbs vs. 534,000 for an A333.
Either way the A330 is not a small widebody. A 767 would be my definition of a small widebody. If DL wants proven/old technology then why not order som new 767's?
It is indeed small. Smaller than any other modern wide body, excluding the 767. What else is there? Yep, nothing else smaller.
Denolloyd is offline  
Old Mar 12, 2014, 3:35 pm
  #26  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Orlando, FL Area
Programs: Delta SkySponge ExtraAbsorbent, SPG Gold
Posts: 29,988
Originally Posted by Denolloyd
Wirelessly posted (iPhone 3G: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 7_0_6 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/537.51.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/7.0 Mobile/11B651 Safari/9537.53)



Number of seats does not define aircraft size. By your definition, the Singapore a345's were smaller aircraft than DL MD80's.
God have mercy. How stupid of me to think that Anderson was referring to Delta's fleet.
readywhenyouare is offline  
Old Mar 12, 2014, 3:48 pm
  #27  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: KUL/TPA/OTP
Programs: UA1k, DL
Posts: 3,138
Wirelessly posted (iPhone 3G: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 7_0_6 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/537.51.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/7.0 Mobile/11B651 Safari/9537.53)

Originally Posted by readywhenyouare
Originally Posted by Denolloyd
Wirelessly posted (iPhone 3G: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 7_0_6 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/537.51.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/7.0 Mobile/11B651 Safari/9537.53)



Number of seats does not define aircraft size. By your definition, the Singapore a345's were smaller aircraft than DL MD80's.
God have mercy. How stupid of me to think that Anderson was referring to Delta's fleet.
You win. Carryon.
Denolloyd is offline  
Old Mar 12, 2014, 4:10 pm
  #28  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: SEA
Programs: AS 75k
Posts: 922
Originally Posted by FN-GM
The 787-3 was basically a 787-8 with different wings. It was the same size.
Right, but depending on seating configuration, it flew a few more people than the 753 over a somewhat shorter distance. It would theoretically be useful for heavy traffic domestic routes as a replacement for the 763, but again, nobody wanted it.
WestSideBilly is offline  
Old Mar 12, 2014, 4:16 pm
  #29  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Orlando, FL Area
Programs: Delta SkySponge ExtraAbsorbent, SPG Gold
Posts: 29,988
Originally Posted by Denolloyd
Wirelessly posted (iPhone 3G: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 7_0_6 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/537.51.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/7.0 Mobile/11B651 Safari/9537.53)



It is indeed small. Smaller than any other modern wide body, excluding the 767. What else is there? Yep, nothing else smaller.
I missed this one. If we are to assume Anderson was referring to MTOW to base size then the 787-8 is smaller than the A330. AlphaGolf listed the A333 MTOW at 534,000 lbs and the A330-200 is listed at 510,000 lbs. The Boeing 787-8 has a lower MTOW of 502,500 lbs. You're above statement is incorrect if we are to consider the Boeing 787-8 a "modern wide body".
readywhenyouare is offline  
Old Mar 12, 2014, 5:06 pm
  #30  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2006
Programs: DL SkyClub Lifer
Posts: 10,000
If Delta is moving away from 747s, and opting for aircraft lighter than 777s (which may still carry just as many people), it sounds like they're trying to save fuel by flying lighter. Some of the newer models may save weight by using composite materials, but I can't help thinking they're sacrificing some cargo capacity as well.

Maybe they're betting that cargo will continue to decline as a percentage of their total revenue, and choosing their future fleet based on that? I know not long ago Northwest had the biggest cargo operation of any US passenger carrier, but I think Delta retired all their 747 freighters pretty quickly after the merger.
DanTravels is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.