N639DL

Along with some 752, 753, 738, 739, 717, 319, and possibly MD90 and a small amount of 320s. Not including RJs.

Beckles

Not so sure about this, Republic has an order for uncommitted aircraft so there is certainly an opportunity for UA or AA, if they had any desire to do so, to get aircraft relatively soon. I doubt DL cares about this much honestly.
The seats are not wider than the E190's they are not getting now, or any of the other modern Embraers.

Certainly I agree it's better than 3-3, but not sure why you're trying to say it's better than the modern Embraers it competes against that are 2-2.
Shame you're not a betting man, I'd love to take that bet. It's highly unlikely that some of the more modern aircraft, especially the 737-900's still being delivered, will be gone in May 2026.

3Cforme

I'll take that one: An ~87% load factor could give everyone seated in a 3-bank an empty seat next to them. Window or aisle + empty seat adjacent is as good as it gets in regular coach anymore.

Beckles

Show your math please, although DL has not announced an exact configuration I don't buy your claim that only ~13% of seats will be middle seats, it will be more like 18% I suspect (that would be ~102 seats, 12 FC, ~90 coach). I think 2+2 with wider coach seats is better than 2+3, I understand the case you're making, but the reality is when domestic mainline load factor of paid passengers is 87% (which it was in 2015), there are going to be lots of occupied middle seats once you add in non-revs.

The CS will clearly have an advantage in that it's smallest aircraft is near the top of the Embraer range, but if we're just talking CS100 vs. (now cancelled) EMB-190, I would have preferred the EMB-190. I am not complaining about the CS at all, looks like it will be a very good aircraft ... just slightly less comfortable seating than the oh-so-generous EMB's.

ATOBTTR

The math is "right" is close depending on the exact configuration and if it's counted across the entire plane (including FC). Example: The 717 has 120 seats, 19 of which are middle seats in Rows 10-29 on the right side (no "middle" seat in Row 20, where the row only has two seats on the right side) . 19/120 = 15.8% of seats are middle seats, or 84.2% of seats are not middle seats.

I was with you for most of your post, but I have to say I'd take that bet if I were a betting man. DL is still taking delivery of 737-900s so I highly doubt DL will be getting rid of the 737s before several of them even come due for their first D Check.

Every1 Get A Life

You are incorrect that the EJets have wider seats than the CSeries.

The CSeries has 18.5" wide aisle and window seats and 19" wide middle seats. http://commercialaircraft.bombardier...s/Comfort.html

The EJets has 18.25" wide seats. http://www.embraercommercialaviation...E190_Cabin.pdf

Beckles

Is it "right" or is it close? The number of "~87%" has no basis in a realistic configuration in my opinion. I was generous assuming the aircraft would have 12 FC seats (I'm hopeful ... but that would put it at the high end on % of FC seats), I think that's an absolute maximum. If that is correct, and assuming it had even just 88 coach seats (assuming maybe one or two missing for the first row of Y/exit row), that makes an even 100 seats to make the math easy, to get to "~87%" non-middles means at most 14 middle seats (I'm being generous in rounding the "~87%" to 86%) ... 88 coach seats with 14 middle seats, the math just doesn't work. Admittedly we're only talking about 3 or 4 seat difference here, but I just don't understand the point of making up such a precise sounding number that just isn't realistic.

As I mentioned, DL's 2015 load factor was 87% ... and that does not include non-revs, so the reality is whether it's 13%, 16%, or 18% middle seats, they will often be occupied, more so at the 16% or 18% levels.

Ultimately though, none of this changes my fundamental belief and what I was saying in that Bombardier's 2-3 is not better than Embraer's 2-2 for seat comfort for all passengers, are you disagreeing with that? You are 100% guaranteed not to be stuck in a middle seat (or stuck beside someone in a middle seat needing to lean one way or the other to make room at times), and the seats are wider to boot on the 2-2 Embraers.

Beckles

For some reason I had it in my head the EMB's were 19" seats in coach ... okay, so the CS is planned to have wider seats ... maybe it will make those 13%, 16% or 18% middle seats bearable less miserable.

ATOBTTR

I initially said "right" and then edited my post to say "right" but guess I didn't edit it correctly. Either way, the difference is small and a much better percentage than in a 3-3 cabin. That's what I was trying to point out.

Now that is an excellent point and I'll admit not one I factored in when responding. I was simply responding to the math but didn't consider non-revs that don't count towards paid load factor.

Not disagreeing at all. I really like the E-Jets since every seat is a good seat. I was only responding to the math portion in which I understood how one could get to where up to an ~85% LF you could theoretically still have no passengers in a middle seat (which of course assumes people up front would be willing to move around the plane), but as I mentioned above, you are correct in bringing in the point about non-revs.

The Lev

Delta has provided the DIP financing for Republic, so has significant control over what happens to those slots. I do agree that if AA or UA were to dangle a significant order in front of BBD, they would almost certainly find a way to open up slots for them - but almost certainly not until after a bunch of DL's aircraft have been delivered. Not sure either of those guys are in a rush to order, so DL will at the veryt least have a meaningful headstart. I do agree that DL probably doesn't care much about this, but it is currently an opportunity if they choose to use it.
As Every1 Get a Life cited, yes the CSeries seats are wider. If you go back to my original post, I said 2-3 is "often" better not "always". Even if we assume a 90% load factor, that implies that more than half the middle seats can be left vacant. Personally I'll take an empty middle seat beside me over a passenger beside me in a 2-2 configuration. How about you? If you don't want to play that lottery, book seats on the "2" side.

If fuel prices remain anywhere close to where they are now, you are probably correct - and DL may fly the 737-900 (and others) until 2046.

StayingHomeIsBetter

http://www.travelpulse.com/news/airl...e-cseries.html

jaysona

There are some nice exterior, interior passenger cabin, cockpit, cargo bay, lavatory and galley photos in the article.

http://www.businessinsider.com/bomba...s-delta-2016-5

woodford02A

keep in mind these are likely just the sample/prototype plane BBD has been showing potential airlines and DL will customize theirs as they see fit

jaysona

The aircraft pictured in the article is not a prototype. The aircraft is MSN50006, also referred to as P1 sometimes which stands for Production 1. It is the first airframe that is a production model and does not have any experimental equipment in it and was assembled as would be any other production aircraft.

The cabin seating and lack of IFE are things Delta can customize in terms of options, but everything else cabin wise, galley wise, etc are pretty representative of what would be delivered.

The Situation

Couple articles today mentioned that Embraer is exploring a WTO challenge against the bailout Bombardier received from the government of Quebec. Embraer pointed to the Delta deal as evidence of unfair practice. Take the number with a grain of salt, but it sounds like Delta got a 2/3 discount on the CS100 jets, which would price them at just under $24M each.