coke cans and winglets

I submitted a complaint last night because someone needed to tell them how twisted and backwards their policies are. I hate the CRJ200 too but that's all DL flies into SBN unfortunately.

DLASflyer

No but as covered in another thread, they use entirely fresh outside air rather than a mix of fresh and recirculated air. So arguably the safest bird in the fleet on that count.

spongenotbob

This thread is a bit confusing but it seems there are multiple data points emerging.

Is Delta no longer guaranteeing an empty seat next to you (if traveling solo) in Y?

ethernal

Yes, that is the implication. I'm assuming that Delta concluded that statistically there are enough couples traveling together that 60% capacity is good enough for X% of flights on 2x2. It sounds like OP may have been on one of the Y (100%-X%) flights. I assume it's very route specific where it's mostly solo travelers.

Agree it's disappointing. Seems almost petty to try to eke out an extra 10% capacity on 50 or 75 seater. We're talking about 5 or 8 seats.

SFTNYC

I think they're blocking "middle" seats for parties of 1-2, though on aircraft that seat 2x2, there are no middle seats so they're supposed to be blocking 1 column of seats (still subject to the overall ~70% economy class capacity restriction or whatever it is now thru 10/31). First is capped at 50% thru 10/31 (or 67% for RJ's)

MSPeconomist

In normal times, selling 5 to 8 more coach seats or not is the difference between a flight being profitable versus operating at a loss.

ethernal

Yes, but we're not in normal times. Every flight is operating at a loss on a fixed+marginal cost basis. Obviously the big change in the past two weeks is that the marginal cost characteristic has changed (since labor is no longer covered). Before October 1st, marginal costs were basically fuel, landing/gate fees, and maintenance. Now labor has re-entered as a marginal cost. I'm assuming that to exceed marginal cost on the regional flights they need 60% capacity.

My point is that the relative to the overall seat capacity of Delta overall, the extra 5-8 seats on these regional jets is such a trivial amount relative to their overall seat capacity on mainline it isn't worth the brand risk. I see on other forms of social media (Instagram, Reddit, Facebook) that Delta is getting a lot of kudos for the middle seat blocking and masks. Admittedly, no idea if that translates to sales - but surprised they want to take the heat. Delta and Southwest has mostly stayed out of headlines for crammed planes like AA and UA. It's bad enough to cram a plane, it's even worse (as evidenced by this thread) if there are missed expectations thinking the plane wasn't going to be crammed and it ends up crammed.

spongenotbob

Source: https://news.delta.com/more-space-ho...s-january-2021

Looks like they've quietly given themselves a whole lot of wiggle room on anything other than "middle seats". Hmmm... disappointing.

fly747first

Source? You would end up at a loss if you sell 5-8 additional cheap coach tickets and then have to pay compensation and/or meal and hotel vouchers, not to mention huge capacity differences depending on aircraft.

MCO Flyer

DL has never guaranteed an empty seat next to you on RJs. With DLs Y seat cap at 60% and all RJs are in a 2-2 configuration, there will and always has been a possibility of sitting next to someone on a RJ. If DL wanted to guarantee everyone an empty seat on RJs, DL would need to restrict Y capacity to 50%.

cmd320

Again, the logic of this escapes me. Is it somehow 'safer' to sit next to someone on an RJ than a mainline aircraft? I think not...

Often1

The whole thing is just meant to make people feel safer rather than actually making them safer. If the guidance everywhere other than aircraft cabins is 6 feet, not sure this matters that much. Not suggesting that DL ought to block seats to achieve 6 feet, but that's what it would take.

ethernal

I think treating it as a binary "safe vs. not safe" is a bit silly. Reality is it's a gradient. Being 6 feet away does not guarantee safety, nor does being right next to an infected person guarantee infection. I think it's pretty intuitive that being shoulder to shoulder is far worse than being separated by nearly two feet.

MSPeconomist

The 6 feet distance (or 2 meters where the metric system is used) is just an arbitrary rule to reduce risk substantially; indeed, early in the COVID-19 pandemic, three feet or one meter was often stated as the standard. People should stay farther apart, but 3 feet is better than 1 foot and 10-12 feet would be better than 6 feet. The idea is to reduce the probability of becoming infected (or the chance of a severe infection) as much as you reasonably can, not to make the spread of infection totally impossible.

It greatly helps that DL blocks seats, but keeping everyone always 6 feet apart would be impractical on a flight. People who insist on a guarantee of 6 feet have no choice but to fly private if well-spaced suites aren't available on the route.

rylan

Probably the best thing is that they are using hepa filters and good cabin airflow. Crank open the vents and direct them just in front of or to the side of your head.