Originally Posted by bennos (Post 27086760)

Agreed it would be better than the 777 seats. The A330 center seats are OK as is... you can slide them forward so you can sort of talk to each other.

I was really comparing against the 763/764 seats (since these are basically bigger versions), where having one console between you isn't that bad (unless your goal is cuddling in flight), but having two consoles would be a far reach.

Originally Posted by Xeno (Post 27087950)

One irony of this announcement is that I have been plotting to get one last ride on the 744 UD one last time regardless of the cost, I am now shifting my attention to trying to find a way to get in this forthcoming D1.

Originally Posted by fly747first (Post 27109491)

The DL 777 D1 seats are brutal, hard to believe they offer such a bad hard product to Australia.

Originally Posted by Bradhattan (Post 27109500)

EDIT: didn't add content.....

Xeon...are you referring to DL UD specifically? You must know you still have options albeit narrowing on the old (and new apparently) 747 if you take another carrier. I got to fly an old 747 with KLM UD a couple years ago. Really nice nice but bland food. Soon taking a new bird 78H ID -JFK to AKL via ICN on Korean -both flights.....no doors but the staggered suites look nice and secluded!

Originally Posted by Xeno (Post 27110121)

BTW, that 744 was one of if not the first 747 made and is now in a museum as the captain let me sit in his seat and said that was the final run for that particular 747.

Originally Posted by Xeno (Post 27110121)

... The flight was short (CDG-DTW) and I only slept 1 hour to take advantage of all the benefits.

Originally Posted by Xeno (Post 27110121)

BTW, that 744 was one of if not the first 747 made and is now in a museum as the captain let me sit in his seat and said that was the final run for that particular 747.

Originally Posted by jimrpa (Post 27110244)

The first 747 ever made would have been a 100, not a 400 and Pan Am was the launch carrier, not Delta. Also, the very small (by today's standards) upper deck was configured as a lounge and it certainly did not have lie-flats in business class :D

Originally Posted by rylan (Post 27110274)

I think he meant the first -400. That ship, N661US, was actually the first production of the 747-400 and used for test flights before going to NWA back in 1989.

Originally Posted by jimrpa (Post 27110244)

The first 747 ever made would have been a 100, not a 400 and Pan Am was the launch carrier, not Delta. Also, the very small (by today's standards) upper deck was configured as a lounge and it certainly did not have lie-flats in business class :D

Originally Posted by jrl767 (Post 27110355)

there are a handful of FTers booked on DL281 (DTW-SEA) on 15 Sep, so we will see your "short" (~9 hrs, ~3900 miles) and raise you (well, lower you :D) by about 50% (~4.8 hrs, ~1920 miles)

Obviously, I was referring to the first aircraft that went into commercial service, not the actual various test articles or whatever they were referred to as :D


correct; N661US (line #696; Boeing tabulation #RT401) is the #1 744; it will reside in the Delta Museum in ATL after being restored to display-worthy condition

the very first 747 (RA001, N7470) is at the Museum of Flight at Boeing Field in Seattle ... having been on about two dozen test flights, in various seat locations both downstairs and upstairs (as well as standing on the flight deck to monitor some uninstrumented test conditions), I can assure everyone here that it did not have anything resembling a lounge or any kind of biz class -- much less lie-flat -- accommodations :D

PA was indeed the launch customer, but their first delivery was apparently the #10 jet off the line (I'll research this a bit more)

Originally Posted by lamont2718 (Post 27109800)

US-Australia has historically been an uncompetitive market for hard product. QF primarily uses 2-2-2 layouts in J and even 2-3-2 on its 747s. VA has also used 2-3-2 until recently. While the soft product on those carriers is better than on DL, their hard product is not exactly superior to DL's herringbone configuration with direct aisle access.

Originally Posted by ijgordon (Post 27110676)

And in an odd turn of events, AA now offers the best hard product (though I suppose tied with VA's new offering?), and it's actually the surest long-haul upgrade in their whole system...go figure.

Originally Posted by jdrtravel (Post 27110680)

The race to be better is good. UA's new product looks solid, and is forcing DL to invest so they are not #3.

Originally Posted by Longboater (Post 27110684)

DL was planning their new product at the same time as UA was planning Polaris.

Originally Posted by jrl767 (Post 27110355)

PA was indeed the launch customer, but their first delivery was apparently the #10 jet off the line (I'll research this a bit more)

Originally Posted by vincentharris (Post 27071745)

Guess DL is starting to feel pressure from foreign airlines, plus Qatar in ATL now, and an airport authority/mayor who is not allowing DL to have the majority in town. (Both were quoted saying they are courting other airlines to ATL, because a world class airport needs options blah blah blah etc)

Originally Posted by HornsKeith (Post 27112500)

So perhaps a different kind of question: what's driving the quest for better and better business class seating? I'm not talking about the Air France La Premiere type, but just the regular business class for international flights. I can only imagine such improvements will result in higher business class pricing (no matter what DL says). Are companies really willing to pay even more than today?

I mostly ask because a lot of DL international flights are already $5k to $8k for a round trip- a tough corporate pill to swallow when Y is $1800. Or am I missing something?

(I wish there were instead cheaper, no frills lie flat options for sleeping flights that would simply make the option more palatable to employers.... but I could be in the minority)

Keith

Originally Posted by jdrtravel (Post 27112644)

I don't think the hope is that it will necessarily result in higher prices, but rather, more people choosing to fly Delta who pay the already very high prices. I think that all of the airlines are doing what they can to attract the relatively fixed amount of customers who pay full or close to full J fares. The price is always a result of a variety of market factors, and I don't think the seat is the primary factor in price. But it may be a major factor in a customers choice of where to spend that $5-$10 K.

Originally Posted by TrojanTraveler (Post 27113892)

Does anyone know what the range is on the 350s that DL will be receiving? Can they fly routes as long as, say, JFK-HKG?

Originally Posted by Longboater (Post 27114331)

Yeah, they will be receiving 268 tonne MTOW A350-900 which have a given range of 7,590 nm. But with an increase to 280 tonne MTOW, it'll have a range of 8,100 nm. I expect DL will resume DTW-HKG when enough are in the fleet, say 2019/2020.

Originally Posted by TrojanTraveler (Post 27116878)

So the planes that can fly JFK-HKG, they won't get into service until 2019/2020?

Originally Posted by rylan (Post 27072088)

I wonder if they're using the Thompson Vantage XL seats modified with a door?

Originally Posted by Longboater (Post 27117097)

Well, they will only be receiving 11 in 2017/2018. The first six will go ahead and replace the 747 on DTW-NRT/ICN/PVG.

Originally Posted by Gig103 (Post 27856714)

Bumping an old thread - heading to PVG for a trip in spring 2018, has this DTW-PVG been nailed down or confirmed? To go PHX-DTW-PVG wouldn't be ideal, but for my first introduction to D1 I think a suite would be starting off with a bang!

Originally Posted by KeepItReal (Post 27856786)

tough call. Delta has only been on record saying that for the most part, the 350's are replacing the 747's. DTW-PVG for the most part is a 777 or a A330 so I would think not but who knows, nothing is certain yet. They are definitely going TPAC and the 747 TPAC routes are DTW-ICN/NRT and not sure of the other one.

Originally Posted by gooselee (Post 27856840)

DTW-PVG is a 747 route.

Originally Posted by meh130 (Post 27174501)

Taking a closer look, and the fact Factory Design is the design house behind Thompson Vantage XL, I think that is exactly what this is. A variant of the Vantage XL modified into a suite with a door.

This is actually very smart by Delta. It gives them differentiation (a suite) that takes up no more room than a high-end lie flat business class seat.

Originally Posted by javabytes (Post 27856871)

Responding late, but this was confirmed a couple of weeks before your post: https://runwaygirlnetwork.com/2016/0...77-biz-suites/

A door is nice and all, but in keeping with Delta's tradition of being overly impressed with itself, I can't wait to see what they will do to fares (cash and award) once they've installed these seats. When I think of Suite, I think of SQ, JAL, EK, EY, etc. The reality is Delta has put some higher walls up around a flat bed business class seat (table stakes in today's competitive landscape)... which helps make it a nicer business class seat, but isn't transformative.

Originally Posted by KeepItReal (Post 27856865)

In fact, its a 777 at least up until March 1st.

Originally Posted by gooselee (Post 27856916)

Starting mid-March it goes back to 747, I believe through EOS. I also flew a 747 on that exact route recently.

But basically, I think DTW-PVG is indeed a candidate for an A350 route, though nobody knows for sure at this point exactly where DL will start deploying them.

ETA: Per the 747 wiki, the DTW-PVG downgrade is just for 12/16 through 3/24.

Originally Posted by KeepItReal (Post 27856901)

I will definitely make sure I am on the inaugural.

Originally Posted by KeepItReal (Post 27856952)

That makes sense, I only checked a few random dates which showed all 777. I've even seen A330's on this route. Knowing what I know now, I would agree that dtw-pvg is a likely candidate for the A350. I can also see DL putting the 350 at LAX to gain the upper hand against AA and UA's LAX - PVG flights.

Originally Posted by javabytes (Post 27856871)

When I think of Suite, I think of SQ, JAL, EK, EY, etc.

Originally Posted by pbarnette (Post 27857133)

By JAL, do you mean the same JAL that calls the same seats DL currently uses (e.g. sans door and without the extra space) "Sky Suites"? Or is it a different JAL? But, yeah, DL is "overly impressed with itself". Right.

Word to the wise: you probably don't want to use, as a counterpoint, an airline that is more guilty of this apparently heinous crime than DL.

Originally Posted by javabytes (Post 27857216)

Mea culpa. Trying to do too many things at once today. Goes to show what that tiny little word can do in terms of blurring the lines in peoples' heads.

Originally Posted by pbarnette (Post 27857320)

I don't think it shows that at all.

Originally Posted by javabytes (Post 27858001)

Now that I've wrapped up my workday, and upon further review, I stand by my original statement... JAL refers to both its JAL Suite (F) and Sky Suite (J) as "suites"; the former is what I had in mind. I have the same issues with JAL categorizing the J seats as "suites" as I do DL.