Delta goes with Airbus; A350-900 & A330NEO
Nov 19, 2014, 8:38 pm
#46
Formerly known as jbalis
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Bangkok
Programs: Delta Diamond, Starwood Gold, National Executive, MGM Noir,
Posts: 342
Won't some of the Airbus aircraft be assembled in Alabama or is that only narrow body?
IMO, with BA's manufacturing process on the 787 it is hard to stamp the "Made in USA" label on it. Just like it is hard to stamp a "Made in France/EU" label on the Airbus aircraft (for example, Spirit Aerosystems, Wichita, KS makes fuselage and wing components of the A350).
Cool infographic from the Seattle Times on the 787's part manufacture and country of origin:
http://seattletimes.com/multimedia/n...oeing-787.html
To me, this seems like Airbus was able to deliver a comparable product at a competitive price in the needed time. BA wasn't able to meet those requirements (however reasonable they may have been) so Delta made the business decision to go with Airbus.
IMO, with BA's manufacturing process on the 787 it is hard to stamp the "Made in USA" label on it. Just like it is hard to stamp a "Made in France/EU" label on the Airbus aircraft (for example, Spirit Aerosystems, Wichita, KS makes fuselage and wing components of the A350).
Cool infographic from the Seattle Times on the 787's part manufacture and country of origin:
http://seattletimes.com/multimedia/n...oeing-787.html
To me, this seems like Airbus was able to deliver a comparable product at a competitive price in the needed time. BA wasn't able to meet those requirements (however reasonable they may have been) so Delta made the business decision to go with Airbus.
Nov 19, 2014, 8:41 pm
#47
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Orlando, FL Area
Programs: Delta SkySponge ExtraAbsorbent, SPG Gold
Posts: 29,988
huh? Thats not apples to apples at all.
the 787-8 and 787-9 have basically the same trip costs. So the large 787-9 cost the same as the 787-8 to fly, why would you buy the 787-8?
Most carriers who got the 787-8 did so to get them early. That is why you are now slowly but surely seeing more and more people convert to the 789.
the 787-8 and 787-9 have basically the same trip costs. So the large 787-9 cost the same as the 787-8 to fly, why would you buy the 787-8?
Most carriers who got the 787-8 did so to get them early. That is why you are now slowly but surely seeing more and more people convert to the 789.
I was comparing the 787 (again, why assume I'm just refering to the -8?) to Delta's 330/350 order. Every1GetALife was saying that bigger aircraft are always better. I disagreed. When it comes to replacing a 767 the 330/350 are overkill. A 787 is the best 767 replacement. Airbus has nothing in the 767 size/range category.
Nov 19, 2014, 8:48 pm
#48
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,601
Won't some of the Airbus aircraft be assembled in Alabama or is that only narrow body?
IMO, with BA's manufacturing process on the 787 it is hard to stamp the "Made in USA" label on it. Just like it is hard to stamp a "Made in France/EU" label on the Airbus aircraft (for example, Spirit Aerosystems, Wichita, KS makes fuselage and wing components of the A350).
Cool infographic from the Seattle Times on the 787's part manufacture and country of origin:
http://seattletimes.com/multimedia/n...oeing-787.html
To me, this seems like Airbus was able to deliver a comparable product at a competitive price in the needed time. BA wasn't able to meet those requirements (however reasonable they may have been) so Delta made the business decision to go with Airbus.
IMO, with BA's manufacturing process on the 787 it is hard to stamp the "Made in USA" label on it. Just like it is hard to stamp a "Made in France/EU" label on the Airbus aircraft (for example, Spirit Aerosystems, Wichita, KS makes fuselage and wing components of the A350).
Cool infographic from the Seattle Times on the 787's part manufacture and country of origin:
http://seattletimes.com/multimedia/n...oeing-787.html
To me, this seems like Airbus was able to deliver a comparable product at a competitive price in the needed time. BA wasn't able to meet those requirements (however reasonable they may have been) so Delta made the business decision to go with Airbus.
and get that logic out of here.
Where was I comparing the 787-8 and 787-9? I'm well aware of the similar trip costs between the two.
I was comparing the 787 (again, why assume I'm just refering to the -8?) to Delta's 330/350 order. Every1GetALife was saying that bigger aircraft are always better. I disagreed. When it comes to replacing a 767 the 330/350 are overkill. A 787 is the best 767 replacement. Airbus has nothing in the 767 size/range category.
I was comparing the 787 (again, why assume I'm just refering to the -8?) to Delta's 330/350 order. Every1GetALife was saying that bigger aircraft are always better. I disagreed. When it comes to replacing a 767 the 330/350 are overkill. A 787 is the best 767 replacement. Airbus has nothing in the 767 size/range category.
anyways.....For the most part this was about time. Sounds like the 350s will be here in 2016/2017 and all Boeing could offer in the same time frame was 777s. Don't worry, Delta will have 787s too.
Nov 19, 2014, 8:49 pm
#49
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,601
I think that it is only the narrow body that is done here, according to there website they have 1200 employees, that is a far cry from the 168,000 Boeing does. I think its safe to say Boeing is far more "american". I feel that Delta is free to make whatever choices it wants to make, I do wish they bought more local so to speak. I also was replying to the other poster who said that supporting buying American was equal to rinding around in the mud on my ATV.
I think you will find that most of those employees, outside of the FALs are 737/767/777/747 related.
the 787 is a very outsourced plane.....
Nov 19, 2014, 8:53 pm
#50
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Wesley Chapel, FL
Programs: American Airlines
Posts: 29,973
Nov 19, 2014, 9:02 pm
#51
Formerly known as jbalis
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Bangkok
Programs: Delta Diamond, Starwood Gold, National Executive, MGM Noir,
Posts: 342
168,000 vs 1,200. I am sure some jobs from Boeing are outsourced but I will type it again 168,000 vs 1,200 are we really having a talk about what one is made more in America?
Nov 19, 2014, 9:06 pm
#52
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: ATL
Programs: DL PM Reserve
Posts: 567
Well, what's done is done. All I want is for Anderson to correct his statement. Anderson declared that he doesn't like unproven technology. What he meant to say was "We don't want unproven technology unless it comes from Airbus. Apparently he is ok ordering an aircraft that hasn't even entered service yet and another that hasn't even been designed. For once, UA has made a better decision than DL. They will have a smaller widebody (787) to cover smaller international markets.
Nov 19, 2014, 9:07 pm
#53
Join Date: May 2006
Programs: DL Diamond
Posts: 340
Where was I comparing the 787-8 and 787-9? I'm well aware of the similar trip costs between the two.
I was comparing the 787 (again, why assume I'm just refering to the -8?) to Delta's 330/350 order. Every1GetALife was saying that bigger aircraft are always better. I disagreed. When it comes to replacing a 767 the 330/350 are overkill. A 787 is the best 767 replacement. Airbus has nothing in the 767 size/range category.
I was comparing the 787 (again, why assume I'm just refering to the -8?) to Delta's 330/350 order. Every1GetALife was saying that bigger aircraft are always better. I disagreed. When it comes to replacing a 767 the 330/350 are overkill. A 787 is the best 767 replacement. Airbus has nothing in the 767 size/range category.
It is common knowledge that the A330-300/900 and the 787-9 are more or less THE EXACT SAME SIZE aircraft. Airbus claims to have a couple seat advantage on the A330-900 vs the 787-9 due to some new cabin innovations on the neo. Looking at the Virgin Atlantic 787-9 vs A330-300 basically validates this. If you aren't talking about the 787-8....then the A330-300/900 and the 787-9 are the same exact size and your argument holds no water
Nov 19, 2014, 9:25 pm
#54
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,601
Yes we really are having that talk cause you are proving that you know next to nothing about the 787. You can post 168,000 all you want but if the bulk of them don't have anything to do with the 787 that number means exactly NOTHING when it comes to topic at hand.
So some jobs means,
Leading edges, flaps, rudders, body faring, tail cone, wings, wing tips, wing box, landing gear, landing gear doors, horizontal stabs, doors, cargo doors and the middle fuselage(ie most of the fuselage) are all done OUTSIDE of the US
on the flip side, the nose/cockpit, Vertical fin, and the rear fuselage are done in the US.
I would recommend you learn a little bit more about the 787 and its production before you make Boeing out to be some kind of All american supper hero. Why exactly do you think the IAM has been having a complete s**t fit over the 787? It sure as heck isn't cause they think Boeing should be doing less work in the us on it.
the 787 is a made around the world airplane that happens to be put together in the US.
Nov 19, 2014, 9:26 pm
#55
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Orlando, FL Area
Programs: Delta SkySponge ExtraAbsorbent, SPG Gold
Posts: 29,988
It is common knowledge that the A330-300/900 and the 787-9 are more or less THE EXACT SAME SIZE aircraft. Airbus claims to have a couple seat advantage on the A330-900 vs the 787-9 due to some new cabin innovations on the neo. Looking at the Virgin Atlantic 787-9 vs A330-300 basically validates this. If you aren't talking about the 787-8....then the A330-300/900 and the 787-9 are the same exact size and your argument holds no water
Nov 19, 2014, 9:39 pm
#56
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,601
Virgin with a 30/35/198 is much close to what Delta would offer (United is almost 50 C and 88Y+ on the 789.)
Nov 19, 2014, 9:40 pm
#57
Join Date: May 2006
Programs: DL Diamond
Posts: 340
Delta keeps business between doors 1 and 2 on the A330-300s, which is very efficient for total seat count. United gives way past door 2 with lots of business. Not efficient.
http://www.seatmaestro.com/airplanes...reamliner.html
http://www.seatmaestro.com/airplanes...0-300-3l3.html
Looking at seat maps, Virgin configured the A330-300s and 787-9s almost identically and ended up with nearly the same seat count.
http://www.seatmaestro.com/airplanes...-b787-900.html
http://www.seatmaestro.com/airplanes...0-3-cabin.html
Do yourself a favor and do some research, they offer nearly identical revenue generating floor space.
Nov 19, 2014, 9:45 pm
#58
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Orlando, FL Area
Programs: Delta SkySponge ExtraAbsorbent, SPG Gold
Posts: 29,988
United put 48....yes, 48 business class seats on their 787-9. Of course the seat count is lower than Delta's 34 seat A330-300.
Delta keeps business between doors 1 and 2 on the A330-300s, which is very efficient for total seat count. United gives way past door 2 with lots of business. Not efficient.
http://www.seatmaestro.com/airplanes...reamliner.html
http://www.seatmaestro.com/airplanes...0-300-3l3.html
Looking at seat maps, Virgin configured the A330-300s and 787-9s almost identically and ended up with nearly the same seat count.
http://www.seatmaestro.com/airplanes...-b787-900.html
http://www.seatmaestro.com/airplanes...0-3-cabin.html
Do yourself a favor and do some research, they offer nearly identical revenue generating floor space.
Delta keeps business between doors 1 and 2 on the A330-300s, which is very efficient for total seat count. United gives way past door 2 with lots of business. Not efficient.
http://www.seatmaestro.com/airplanes...reamliner.html
http://www.seatmaestro.com/airplanes...0-300-3l3.html
Looking at seat maps, Virgin configured the A330-300s and 787-9s almost identically and ended up with nearly the same seat count.
http://www.seatmaestro.com/airplanes...-b787-900.html
http://www.seatmaestro.com/airplanes...0-3-cabin.html
Do yourself a favor and do some research, they offer nearly identical revenue generating floor space.
Nov 19, 2014, 9:47 pm
#59
Formerly known as jbalis
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Bangkok
Programs: Delta Diamond, Starwood Gold, National Executive, MGM Noir,
Posts: 342
Some jobs?
Yes we really are having that talk cause you are proving that you know next to nothing about the 787. You can post 168,000 all you want but if the bulk of them don't have anything to do with the 787 that number means exactly NOTHING when it comes to topic at hand.
So some jobs means,
Leading edges, flaps, rudders, body faring, tail cone, wings, wing tips, wing box, landing gear, landing gear doors, horizontal stabs, doors, cargo doors and the middle fuselage(ie most of the fuselage) are all done OUTSIDE of the US
on the flip side, the nose/cockpit, Vertical fin, and the rear fuselage are done in the US.
I would recommend you learn a little bit more about the 787 and its production before you make Boeing out to be some kind of All american supper hero. Why exactly do you think the IAM has been having a complete s**t fit over the 787? It sure as heck isn't cause they think Boeing should be doing less work in the us on it.
the 787 is a made around the world airplane that happens to be put together in the US.
Yes we really are having that talk cause you are proving that you know next to nothing about the 787. You can post 168,000 all you want but if the bulk of them don't have anything to do with the 787 that number means exactly NOTHING when it comes to topic at hand.
So some jobs means,
Leading edges, flaps, rudders, body faring, tail cone, wings, wing tips, wing box, landing gear, landing gear doors, horizontal stabs, doors, cargo doors and the middle fuselage(ie most of the fuselage) are all done OUTSIDE of the US
on the flip side, the nose/cockpit, Vertical fin, and the rear fuselage are done in the US.
I would recommend you learn a little bit more about the 787 and its production before you make Boeing out to be some kind of All american supper hero. Why exactly do you think the IAM has been having a complete s**t fit over the 787? It sure as heck isn't cause they think Boeing should be doing less work in the us on it.
the 787 is a made around the world airplane that happens to be put together in the US.
just a random quote I found...."However, a more recent example of costly production woes guides Boeing's approach to ramping up its commercial output. The Boeing 787's supply chain has proved a trial by fire for the company since 2007, delaying the Dreamliner's deliveries by three-and-a-half years and pushing its first production plateau four years to the right while it absorbs the astronomical costs of the delays.
"What you end up realising is, you need more cost to supervise outside factories" outweighing the benefits of outsourcing design and manufacturing on the 787, says Boeing chief Jim McNerney."
Nov 19, 2014, 10:00 pm
#60
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,601
your right you might know more then myself but from what I do understand is that Boeing is moving some if not most of that manufacturing back to the United States.
just a random quote I found...."However, a more recent example of costly production woes guides Boeing's approach to ramping up its commercial output. The Boeing 787's supply chain has proved a trial by fire for the company since 2007, delaying the Dreamliner's deliveries by three-and-a-half years and pushing its first production plateau four years to the right while it absorbs the astronomical costs of the delays.
"What you end up realising is, you need more cost to supervise outside factories" outweighing the benefits of outsourcing design and manufacturing on the 787, says Boeing chief Jim McNerney."
just a random quote I found...."However, a more recent example of costly production woes guides Boeing's approach to ramping up its commercial output. The Boeing 787's supply chain has proved a trial by fire for the company since 2007, delaying the Dreamliner's deliveries by three-and-a-half years and pushing its first production plateau four years to the right while it absorbs the astronomical costs of the delays.
"What you end up realising is, you need more cost to supervise outside factories" outweighing the benefits of outsourcing design and manufacturing on the 787, says Boeing chief Jim McNerney."
AFAIK no major pieces have been moved to the US.