Delta looking to convert NW's 787 orders into 777s
Dec 2, 2008, 4:58 am
#46
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: SEA
Programs: UA Silver, BA Gold, DL Gold
Posts: 9,779
All true. But I don't think greater fuel efficiency is some sort of magic salve. I think they will need to cut domestic capacity at some point in the relatively near future and don't need to be in any hurry to replace the first 50+ planes they retire. That should give them enough lead time to start getting replacements in the door for the next wave of retirements.
Dec 2, 2008, 8:11 am
#47
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 8,884
And you hit the nail on the head: the 787 was designed/planned for a different type of market. It's not as simple as just counting the number of seats and the useful range of the aircraft and sliding them in/out like they're equals.
I do hope most of the confirmed orders are preserved and that the options are exercised. This is going to be a great aircraft, whenever it starts rolling off the assembly line.
Dec 2, 2008, 8:41 am
#48
Join Date: May 2003
Programs: UA Silver
Posts: 1,931
Somewhat covered in the threads already is that the 787 was meant to fit a new business model - allowing for small loads for long range pax allowing more point-to-point flights vs the larger aircraft relying on the hub-spoke model. It will be interesting to note that this isn't simply an airplane swap, but perhaps a business model shift now that DL has taken over NW.
I don't think the cancellation is that big of a deal, except that there is a "gloating factor" and the corresponding visibility advantage that comes with being the first airline to fly a prestigious plane. Even if NW had not been the very first to fly the Dreamliner, think of the publicity they would have received! After all, look at the coverage that Singapore Airlines got when the A380 entered service!
Dec 2, 2008, 9:15 am
#49
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2001
Programs: DL 1 million, AA 1 mil, HH lapsed Diamond, Marriott Plat
Posts: 28,190
I don't think the cancellation is that big of a deal, except that there is a "gloating factor" and the corresponding visibility advantage that comes with being the first airline to fly a prestigious plane. Even if NW had not been the very first to fly the Dreamliner, think of the publicity they would have received! After all, look at the coverage that Singapore Airlines got when the A380 entered service!
Dec 2, 2008, 9:31 am
#50
Suspended
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Tucson, AZ, USA. UA 1K, reluctant but * best in class * DL FO/MM. Former BA jumpseat rider and scourge of Dilbertian management and apologists. As LX might - and do - say: "....an experienced frequent flyer of international airlines"
Posts: 3,386
I am sure the 787 will be quieter, more comfortable and more sustainable for long flights. But it isn't here yet. It hasn't even flown yet, so this is very premature. The A350 will end up being much closer to the 787 than was originally thought and the cycle will continue.
As long as the 767s are replaced sooner rather than later I'll be happy.
Dec 2, 2008, 9:37 am
#51
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,679
DL will get some PR from the 787 launch, but ANA will have the first plane. Even if DL puts the Thompson cozy seats in 787 Y ANA will still have a superior hard and soft product in every cabin. The Japanese carriers are insane with amenities, JLs domestic F product beats DL's classic BE product.
That being said, the 787 allows DL to take best in class for international for at least a little while. The bigger problem I think is the plane is so far delayed that the Business class seats NW choose are no longer state of the art. One would hope that DL would shift to the Thompson seats up front.
That being said, the 787 allows DL to take best in class for international for at least a little while. The bigger problem I think is the plane is so far delayed that the Business class seats NW choose are no longer state of the art. One would hope that DL would shift to the Thompson seats up front.
Dec 2, 2008, 9:57 am
#52
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: MEL
Programs: DL, QF, QR Gold, MR Lifetime Gold
Posts: 7,003
Sadly, I don't think passenger comfort is a priority. How a plane fits into the business model and the kind of ROI the mgt thinks it can bring are more likely to be the determining factors.
I do wish they paid more attention to it tho. I do my utmost to avoid 767s on TATL flights in Y and there are plenty of comfortable alternatives. I don't know how many people actually do that though; probably not enough to encourage them to take pax comfort more seriously. (Premium service is a different matter entirely.)
PS: I bet they're having a blast reading this thread. We're probably WAY off.
I do wish they paid more attention to it tho. I do my utmost to avoid 767s on TATL flights in Y and there are plenty of comfortable alternatives. I don't know how many people actually do that though; probably not enough to encourage them to take pax comfort more seriously. (Premium service is a different matter entirely.)
PS: I bet they're having a blast reading this thread. We're probably WAY off.
Dec 2, 2008, 10:38 am
#53
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: SEA
Programs: UA Silver, BA Gold, DL Gold
Posts: 9,779
Personally, I am dreading the 787. I think it will give us 757-style claustrophobia in a widebody package. I would be willing to wager that not a single carrier opts for 8-abreast in coach on this plane. What we will be left with is 747-style seat width, a narrower cabin, and (probably) a b**ch-seat heavy 3-3-3 layout. I try to avoid 3-abreast seating configurations like the plague, and this one will likely be no different.
In the front, my guess is it will be a marginal improvement, but I didn't exactly get excited when CO announced that they will turn the seats toward the windows. If that is the best we are going to get, then I'll save the cartwheels.
Dec 2, 2008, 11:14 am
#54
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: YYZ
Programs: AC SE100K, HH G
Posts: 2,454
Are all of you relatively indifferent about seat and cabin width? Or do you think the humidity and windows will make up for it?
Personally, I am dreading the 787. I think it will give us 757-style claustrophobia in a widebody package. I would be willing to wager that not a single carrier opts for 8-abreast in coach on this plane. What we will be left with is 747-style seat width, a narrower cabin, and (probably) a b**ch-seat heavy 3-3-3 layout. I try to avoid 3-abreast seating configurations like the plague, and this one will likely be no different.
In the front, my guess is it will be a marginal improvement, but I didn't exactly get excited when CO announced that they will turn the seats toward the windows. If that is the best we are going to get, then I'll save the cartwheels.
Personally, I am dreading the 787. I think it will give us 757-style claustrophobia in a widebody package. I would be willing to wager that not a single carrier opts for 8-abreast in coach on this plane. What we will be left with is 747-style seat width, a narrower cabin, and (probably) a b**ch-seat heavy 3-3-3 layout. I try to avoid 3-abreast seating configurations like the plague, and this one will likely be no different.
In the front, my guess is it will be a marginal improvement, but I didn't exactly get excited when CO announced that they will turn the seats toward the windows. If that is the best we are going to get, then I'll save the cartwheels.
Dec 2, 2008, 12:10 pm
#55
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Upper Midwest
Programs: DL, AA
Posts: 1,677
Are all of you relatively indifferent about seat and cabin width? Or do you think the humidity and windows will make up for it?
Personally, I am dreading the 787. I think it will give us 757-style claustrophobia in a widebody package. I would be willing to wager that not a single carrier opts for 8-abreast in coach on this plane. What we will be left with is 747-style seat width, a narrower cabin, and (probably) a b**ch-seat heavy 3-3-3 layout. I try to avoid 3-abreast seating configurations like the plague, and this one will likely be no different.
In the front, my guess is it will be a marginal improvement, but I didn't exactly get excited when CO announced that they will turn the seats toward the windows. If that is the best we are going to get, then I'll save the cartwheels.
Personally, I am dreading the 787. I think it will give us 757-style claustrophobia in a widebody package. I would be willing to wager that not a single carrier opts for 8-abreast in coach on this plane. What we will be left with is 747-style seat width, a narrower cabin, and (probably) a b**ch-seat heavy 3-3-3 layout. I try to avoid 3-abreast seating configurations like the plague, and this one will likely be no different.
In the front, my guess is it will be a marginal improvement, but I didn't exactly get excited when CO announced that they will turn the seats toward the windows. If that is the best we are going to get, then I'll save the cartwheels.
Dec 2, 2008, 1:27 pm
#56
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Phoenix/Columbus
Programs: Delta Silver Medallion, United Gold, US Airways silver
Posts: 1,718
I, for one was looking forward to the 787. Alas, another aircraft that I probably will not be able to experience in addition to the A 380. As a NW flyer, I have limited experience with the 777, but really do not like the 767 when I have flown DL and CO. Will be flying the 777 to DEL (I think...) in January on CO in Business. I am a big A 330 fan. Do not like the 757 for international flights.
Dec 2, 2008, 1:39 pm
#57
Join Date: Jul 2004
Programs: DL; AA; UA; CO; LHLX; NZ; QR; EK; BA
Posts: 7,409
Though the 767 in Y does offer the least possibility (of any wide-body aircraft currently flying) of being stuck in a middle seat, with its 2-3-2 configuration.
Dec 2, 2008, 10:49 pm
#59
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 8,884
Are all of you relatively indifferent about seat and cabin width? Or do you think the humidity and windows will make up for it?
Personally, I am dreading the 787. I think it will give us 757-style claustrophobia in a widebody package. I would be willing to wager that not a single carrier opts for 8-abreast in coach on this plane. What we will be left with is 747-style seat width, a narrower cabin, and (probably) a b**ch-seat heavy 3-3-3 layout. I try to avoid 3-abreast seating configurations like the plague, and this one will likely be no different.
In the front, my guess is it will be a marginal improvement, but I didn't exactly get excited when CO announced that they will turn the seats toward the windows. If that is the best we are going to get, then I'll save the cartwheels.
Personally, I am dreading the 787. I think it will give us 757-style claustrophobia in a widebody package. I would be willing to wager that not a single carrier opts for 8-abreast in coach on this plane. What we will be left with is 747-style seat width, a narrower cabin, and (probably) a b**ch-seat heavy 3-3-3 layout. I try to avoid 3-abreast seating configurations like the plague, and this one will likely be no different.
In the front, my guess is it will be a marginal improvement, but I didn't exactly get excited when CO announced that they will turn the seats toward the windows. If that is the best we are going to get, then I'll save the cartwheels.
But the rest is all speculation. Just as some think the creature comforts will be far and above what we're used to, they could also be insignificant if the seating choices are not done with passenger comfort in mind. It's all up in the air. The only things worth discussing are the published facts/statistics from Boeing since none of the airlines, AFAIK, have announced interior design plans.
Dec 2, 2008, 11:17 pm
#60
FlyerTalk Evangelist & Ambassador: China
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: DEN
Programs: DL DM/MM, UA 1K, AA Exp, HH Dia, WOH Glob, IHG Plat, Marriott Gold, NA EE, Hertz PC
Posts: 17,423
Wouldn't that be interesting? DL, which currently has a extensive network of international hub-to-spoke routes, would shift to a more "NW-like" model of international hub-to-hub routes.
I don't think the cancellation is that big of a deal, except that there is a "gloating factor" and the corresponding visibility advantage that comes with being the first airline to fly a prestigious plane. Even if NW had not been the very first to fly the Dreamliner, think of the publicity they would have received! After all, look at the coverage that Singapore Airlines got when the A380 entered service!
I don't think the cancellation is that big of a deal, except that there is a "gloating factor" and the corresponding visibility advantage that comes with being the first airline to fly a prestigious plane. Even if NW had not been the very first to fly the Dreamliner, think of the publicity they would have received! After all, look at the coverage that Singapore Airlines got when the A380 entered service!