SchmutzigMSP

By my count, aside from the transoceanic legs, NW is only flying the NRT-MNL route with the 747. The rest is on A330s, re-configured 757 (have you actually been on one? They're quite nice...), and of course the 763.

No need to apply the "generally" modifier to that. Has DL received a 767 after 2003? NW's oldest A330 is from 2003...

The 767s are older than the A330s and should face the same level of comparative scrutiny that the 744s do from NW. Keep in mind, NW has 32 A330s and 16 744s. The 744s, while an important piece of the international fleet, is now the minority.

And nice rationalization on the PDX market. Same could be said for the NW fleet that people constantly bash (specifically the 744 in this thread). Where do you think customers in MSP/DTW/ATL are going to go?

The answer to that and the PDX question is they always have options if they don't want to fly a particular aircraft. In PDX, it's a short hop to SEA or down to SFO/LAX. In MSP, it's to ORD. In ATL, it's to DFW/IAH...

pbarnette

I was talking about the TPAC legs, since that is the complaint I was addressing. My point is that NW's TPAC product has, historically, been quite poor on a number of routes, and that were someone that offended by the DL 763, I see no reason why they would have been excited by the NW 747. And even the A330, while a very nice plane, isn't really anything special compared to much of what is offered by the Asian carriers. This is especially true in J, where I think WBC is just okay, while Y is much more competitive. As for the 757, it suffers from all of the deficiencies as the 763, only with the added bonus of domestic F seats and that narrow-body feel.

None of this is meant to be that much of a knock on these NW planes (though they aren't exactly deserving of praise). It is merely meant to point out how dubious is the claim that putting a 763 on a second-tier route like PDX-NRT is somehow going to lead to an exodus of former NW TPAC fliers, when such fliers have historically been quite happy to endure the 747 and the 757.

sxf24

I said generally older and inferior, not older or inferior. The 764s with flatbeds are superior in both cabins to the A330.

What do you mean by scrutiny? Does that equate to bashing by NW fan boys?

I've never bashed the 744 and personally think a non-stop flight is preferred to a connection on superior equipment (unless you're talking about a CRJ).

Corporate contracts, which sustain international flights, prefer non-stops. Period.

pbarnette

Indeed. I have never seen a corporate travel policy that explicitly allows deviations from policy for reasons of "equipment" or "FF program". Every one I have ever seen explicitly allow for deviations from policy for non-stop vs connections.

SchmutzigMSP

My point is that Y in the 747 or 763 is a wash. No particular benefit to either unless you're a plane enthusiast, in which case you likely take the 747.
So I was comparing NW vs. DL, and you come back by comparing NW vs. Asian carriers? Talk about missing the point. No U.S. carrier (except perhaps the new UA F) really matches up with any of the "Asian carriers". Let's compare apples to apples.

As for the 757, have you flown it? The "TATL" 757 (aka 75A) has a refurbished interior with more pitch in Y, substantial C/J seat upgrades over domestic FC, and an entirely refurbished interior (new carpets, walls, etc.)

No, it can't compete with the international wide-bodies (especially those "Asian carriers"), but trying to pass it off as a "domestic FC" style experience is misleading and incorrect.


As your partner below pointed out, if C/J is what really keeps an international route afloat, then the 763 pales in comparison to the A330 or the 744. That's it. No comparison to "Asian carriers" applies here. DL had a choice of the A330 or something else on PDX-NRT. They picked about the worst possible product in the combined fleet to replace it with from a customer experience standpoint.

The flatbeds are only up front. How exactly does the 764 in Y surpass the A330 in Y?

The 744 is a favorite whipping-boy of DL fans because of its interior. But those same people seem to forget that the 763 is an equivalent experience in coach (and worse in C/J), and DL has 57 of these birds compared to the 16 744s from NW. The 763s represent a much larger investment in a subpar product. But no DL fan will scrutinize the 763 in the same way they do the 744. I certainly understand why, but then it's hard to have a fact-based discussion.

sxf24

2-3-2 instead of 2-4-2.

Sounds like a personal problem to me.

pbarnette

The biggest difference for passenger comfort, and I think it a decently large difference, is that the 763 is 2-3-2, rather than 3-4-3. The seats are also about an inch wider. Still, neither will win any awards.

I am not concerned with comparing NW to DL. I was responding to the specious claim (not made by you, originally) that DL, by putting the 763 on a marginal route like PDX-NRT is likely to turn off substantial numbers of NW's Asian fliers. The implication is that such fliers are specifically flying NW for the product. But the fact is that this product is not a world-class product.

Why would a group of customers, who already accept a lesser product on many routes, compared to the competition, suddenly leave now? Why, if AVOD in Y is so important to NW's Asian customers, will they fly the 747 or 752? Why, if J quality is so important, would such customers choose NW over SQ, JL, ANA, CX, etc?

I have flown the TATL 757. And it is broadly similar to the 763 experience. The extra pitch in Y is nice, but it still lacks the IFE that people want to ding the 763 for. And, like the 747, it offers lesser width and a lesser cabin layout. In J, it is not as nice as the 763, and the planes I have been on seem to suffer from significant maintenance problems on the J seats.

My comment about domestic FC, however, was due to reports I have read on FT. I thought they were using the Pacific configuration out of NRT. If that isn't the case, then you can ignore that comment. Regardless, you are right (and get the point I was making, even if you want to quibble) that this is not a plane that competes with the likes of SQ, TG, JL, etal.

Actually, the claim is that corporate contracts keep routes afloat. And the point, which you are ignoring, is that corporate contracts are not normally overly concerned with the quality of the product. What they are concerned with, if that, is non-stop vs connection. Whether it is a 763, A330, or a specially modified CRJ, having a non-stop on PDX-NRT gives DL more of a competitive advantage in chasing corporate contracts than the product ever will. And, frankly, I think the non-stop probably helps in the consumer market too. I don't think people are as willing to swap in extra connections as some would like to think.

That is completely false and, I suspect you know it is completely false. Nobody here is saying that the 763 is anything more than it is, and I defy you to find anyone doing so. If you want a "fact-based discussion", then why distort what people are saying?

There are some folks that say they prefer a recliner to a lie-flat (though not sxf24, who explicitly stated that he thought the 763 to be inferior), but that is it. You will find such folks all over FT, saying the same thing about seats on AA or CO or KL or whomever. You will also find people not on FT that prefer a recliner, or that don't particularly care for the NW seat - my wife for instance. For people that prefer a recliner, I don't think you can state categorically that the A330 is a better product in J.

FLYWORLDNOW

FYI - NW originally started the PDX-NRT route in 2004. They started the route with DC-10-30s and the first week of service had multiple 12+ hour delays. Nike (PDX based) put pressure on them and they changed the first SFO-NRT A330-200s to the PDX-NRT route. So basically, for almost the entire 5 years NW has been flying PDX-NRT they have used the new A330-200 aircraft. The customers on this route (Asian and US) have not been subjected to the inferior 744 or 763. The only 757s in NW's Asia service have only flown intra-Asia - not long-haul. It is a fair statement to say that DL is taking a huge risk by bringing the 763 into Asia. They have enough problems with losing the NW name recognition, they don't need to make it worse by bringing their oldest, out-dated long-haul aircraft into Asia.

pbarnette

There is a difference between putting pressure on an airline to deliver reliability and putting pressure on them for a better product. My company, for instance, had an unofficial "ban" on flying BA last year, because of too many lost luggage incidents. They were more than happy, however, to let you fly AF, which has a J product that is, in pretty much every way, inferior to Club World. Hell, they booked folks on Icelandair, which basically has domestic F seats.

AFAIK, nobody with the power to actually drive my company's purchasing decisions has ever approached an airline about improving the on-board product. I would imagine most companies are pretty similar. Indeed, when discussing the new flat-beds that CO will roll out (sometime in 2011, by the sounds of it), Larry K explicitly stated that their corporate customers told them they wouldn't pay extra for them, which is why they went to such creative lengths to keep densities intact. I presume that the same sort of message drove DL's decision to go with the 764 seat they chose, and why BA and UA have 2-4-2 layouts in their flat-bed J cabins.

sbagdon

Time for a tangent... since the WBC/BE consolidation, does BE give out "travel pouches" in Premium cabin. The last WBC segments had little zip pouches with stuff. Just wondering if I'll get any to give away when I get back. Thanks!

DL-Don

I just flew a DL operated flight ATl-NRT and an NW operated flight back. The DL flight was on a 777 with 2-2-2 seating in BE while the NW flight was a 747 with 2-3-2 seating (lower deck). The cabin crew was comparable but I found the DL crew considerably friendlier and did get tired of the rattling carts the NW crew pushed around the cabin instead of serving directly from the galley. The DL crew always seemed to be around when I needed a beverage, etc. while I had to use the call button with the NW crew.

I won't comment too extensively on the cabin condition because clearly a 777 cabin is much newer than an non-refurbished 747 cabin. I will say that I prefer the "no middle seat" BE configuration of the 777.

The seats on the 777 were hands down better than the 747 seats. As a previous poster mentioned, I felt like I was sliding down the seat all the time and the 777 seats were more appropriately padded. I also prefer the leather to the cloth seats.

Both flights offered similar but not identical amenity kits.

sbagdon

Thanks for the amenity kit update. I'll look forward to gifting all my kits.

Staying away from the (now well documented) differences between the hard product of the 747 and 777... were you assigned to one of the 3 lower-deck middle seats? If assigned, did you attempt to move, even to the upper-deck (as required)?

DL-Don

No, I had one of the better lower deck seats... 9A. There is so much room between the bulkhead and the 9A & 9B seats that even when 9B is fully reclined, the 9A passenger can get in and out without climbing over the 9B passenger.

SchmutzigMSP

Try the upper-deck of the 744. No middle seats up there.

Actually, there are only three of the business class "middle" seats on the 744 (9E/10E/11E). All of the other 62 business class seats are either aisle or window.

So, to put it another way, only 4.6% of the business class seats on the 744 could be considered "middle".

DL-Don

I've tried the upper deck and it is generally much warmer than the lower deck. I can't sleep when it is that hot.

With the exception of 4E/4F (which have no air vents), 9A/9B and 77A/77B all other seats require you to climb over the person next to you or to have someone climb over you to use the lavatory, etc. when the seats are reclined. On the 777 with the 2-2-2 seating, the middle two seats allow unobstructed access to the lavatory, leg stretching, etc. which is especially nice when the person next to you is a stranger. Doing the math, 16/50 or 32% of the seats are not obstructed on the 777 while 6/65 or 9.2% are not obstructed on the 747. Since 4EF and 77AB are generally too hot for me, that only leaves 2/65 or 3% of the seats as acceptable (to me).