Delta will send an RFP for 744/767 replacements 'by the end of the month'
Mar 17, 2014, 4:11 pm
#91
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: PVU, SLC
Programs: DL Pork Medallion, PP, GE
Posts: 1,657
Also, since DL has a ton of 763s, lots of pilots with 757/767 type ratings, and many of those pilots have many hours in 763s. If the planes are cheap and you have crew that are already trained to fly them, you can save a lot of money. The same argument can be made for A330s, though I don't know if they would be "cheaper" like the 763s might.
Mar 17, 2014, 4:32 pm
#92
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: SEA
Programs: AS 75k
Posts: 922
And fully trained mx crews, abundant spares, etc.
The A330 is in the same boat (aging design) but based on the order book it'll probably still be made for 5 or 6 more years, though the size of the discount on future orders is probably small. A NEO variant would theoretically have high operating/maintenance carryover, as well.
The A330 is in the same boat (aging design) but based on the order book it'll probably still be made for 5 or 6 more years, though the size of the discount on future orders is probably small. A NEO variant would theoretically have high operating/maintenance carryover, as well.
Mar 17, 2014, 9:05 pm
#93
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: 16,579
There's a huge difference in the economics of operating MD-90's and 717's on domestic short-haul flights and 744's on long-haul flights, just because used MD-90's and 717's work financially does not come close to meaning used 747's or 767's work financially.
Mar 17, 2014, 9:50 pm
#94
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Wayne, PA USA
Programs: DL MM, Marriott Bonvoy Lifetime Titanium, HHonors Gold
Posts: 7,242
My problem with Airbus has nothing to with where they are built. I fly on plenty of Embraer (Brazil) and Bombardier/Candair (Canada) aircraft. Boeing has had it's problems but they acknowledge them and fix them. Airbus has never admitted that any of their aircraft have a flaw and instead sneak in changes under the guise of "performance enhancements" or blame a design flaw on pilot error (AA 587). There have been over 30 incidents of uncommanded rudder movements on Airbus A300/310 aircraft and Airbus turns a blind eye. I also don't care for their philosophy of a "flight protection system". News flash, their planes still crash. Limiting the pilot on what they can and can't do just doesn't sit well with me. Fed Ex 705 would have had a much more tragic ending had they been in an A330. The flight protection system would never have allowed the first officer to make those maneuvers. I'll stick to flying on the Boeing, MD, Embraers, and CRJ's. Hey, one less person on the upgrade list.
Mar 18, 2014, 2:53 am
#95
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: MEL
Programs: DL, QF, QR Gold, MR Lifetime Gold
Posts: 7,004
Please explain that comment. How exactly am I being a hypocrite? The post you referenced was in regards to a user who seems to pop up anytime I make any reference to Boeing or Airbus. I don't follow anyone around waiting for them to comment on a particular subject. Again, please explain your comment.
Also, I'm not sure why people are defensive. I've said time after time that Airbus is not my preference and I give a reason why. I've never told anyone they wrong for disliking Boeing, MD, Embraer, or Bombardier.
Also, I'm not sure why people are defensive. I've said time after time that Airbus is not my preference and I give a reason why. I've never told anyone they wrong for disliking Boeing, MD, Embraer, or Bombardier.
Here is what I find to be hypocrisies:
1. You're praising Boeing for a reason that is not justified in my mind (because Boeing has also been late in addressing issues, e.g. 747 cargo door and UA811).
2. You are saying that someone is defending Airbus because they are from Europe, yet you are from the US and you are defending Boeing.
3. You are not sure why people are defensive, but you are also being defensive.
Please know that I mean no offense by any of this. It's your right to prefer one aircraft over another. Some people like Boeing, others prefer Airbus. There is little chance that someone will actually change their mind based on some FT discussion, so it may be wiser to just accept everyone's preference, regardless of their reasons or whether those reasons make sense.
Mar 18, 2014, 3:08 am
#96
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Orlando, FL Area
Programs: Delta SkySponge ExtraAbsorbent, SPG Gold
Posts: 29,988
Here is what I find to be hypocrisies:
1. You're praising Boeing for a reason that is not justified in my mind (because Boeing has also been late in addressing issues, e.g. 747 cargo door and UA811).
2. You are saying that someone is defending Airbus because they are from Europe, yet you are from the US and you are defending Boeing.
3. You are not sure why people are defensive, but you are also being defensive.
.
1. You're praising Boeing for a reason that is not justified in my mind (because Boeing has also been late in addressing issues, e.g. 747 cargo door and UA811).
2. You are saying that someone is defending Airbus because they are from Europe, yet you are from the US and you are defending Boeing.
3. You are not sure why people are defensive, but you are also being defensive.
.
2. I turned that question on them because someone else threw the "oh, you're from the US..." argument at me even though I clearly stated I have no problem with Embraer or Bombardier. For some reason everyone seems to forget about those two aircraft manufacturers.
3. Yes, the user who started this debate claimed that the only reason some of us don't like Airbus is because we are simply defending US manufacturing. For me, nothing could be further from the truth. Europe, Asia, etc. deliever many goods that are far superior to those built in the US. However, I have never attacked a user for liking Airbus. Plenty have rolled their eyes at me for not caring for Airbus though. I don't want an engineer having the final say on flight control inputs. I want the pilots to have that decision.
Mar 18, 2014, 7:50 pm
#98
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Wayne, PA USA
Programs: DL MM, Marriott Bonvoy Lifetime Titanium, HHonors Gold
Posts: 7,242
Mar 18, 2014, 7:56 pm
#99
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Orlando, FL Area
Programs: Delta SkySponge ExtraAbsorbent, SPG Gold
Posts: 29,988
Mar 19, 2014, 2:36 pm
#101
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: SEA
Programs: AS 75k
Posts: 922
Mar 19, 2014, 2:56 pm
#102
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Wayne, PA USA
Programs: DL MM, Marriott Bonvoy Lifetime Titanium, HHonors Gold
Posts: 7,242
A question was asked, and I offered my answer. I said earlier that I don't like Airbus aircraft, and I've explained why. Given that, it's obvious that I wouldn't like any selection that would include Airbus aircraft. Not sure what your problem with the response is?
Mar 19, 2014, 6:39 pm
#103
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: DFW
Programs: UA, DL, LH, Marriott, Amex
Posts: 554
I don't understand why he claims to be uninterested in "experimental" aircraft, but then brings up the Bombardier C-Series.
The Embraer 195 fits what he's after, and isn't experimental. I know LH flies them around Europe - are they too expensive to fly or something?
The Embraer 195 fits what he's after, and isn't experimental. I know LH flies them around Europe - are they too expensive to fly or something?
Mar 19, 2014, 6:49 pm
#104
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Orlando, FL Area
Programs: Delta SkySponge ExtraAbsorbent, SPG Gold
Posts: 29,988
I would love to see Delta flying E-195's. The E-175 is the most comfortable aircraft DL operates (or rather operated for DL).
Mar 19, 2014, 6:53 pm
#105
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: 16,579
They would be too expensive to fly because of the pilots' scope clause that means they'd have to be flown by mainline pilots. US tried operating E195's with mainline pilots and that lasted for only a few years.