steve64

DL ordered and operated the 747-100.

In the early 1970's, DL became the last of the "trunk" carriers to order the 727 (the stretch model, they never flew the 727-100). These complemented the 727-200s picked up in the merger with Northeast.

In the mid-late 1980's they were one of the last airlines to order the 737-200 which was being phased out by Boeing in favor of the Dash 300/400 models. I'm talking factory orders here, not aircraft from Western.

They are the only US airline to operate all 3 of the "1st generation" of wide-bodies ... 747, L-1011 & DC-10 (the DC-10s were temporary while waiting for the L-1011's).
[I correct myself ...
... when Eastern 1st gained approval for service to Europe, they had to obtain some DC-10s ... by that time the 747s were gone and the L-1011 didn't have the range
... Pan Am had a few L-1011s and then picked up DC-10s when they merged National into their ops, tho they never ordered a DC-10
... United picked up the Pan Am L-1011s in the Pacific Route purchase, but again, UA never ordered the L-1011]

Going back a few more years, Delta operated the Convair along with the DC-8.

IMHO ...
Delta has traditonally been a "hodge-podge" airline and they continue that tradition with the NW aquisition. It makes me wonder if the main reason for the NW purchase is to get their hands on as many Airbus models as they can

The only time frame I can think of when they were a "traditional Douglas" airline was back in the days of the piston props when Douglas ruled the world.

Steve

sxf24

The 747, 727 and 737-200 orders were quite small and most of the Boeing planes (particularly 727s) in the fleet had arrived via acquisition.

If you look at the number of DC-9s, DC-8s, MD-80s, MD-90s and MD-11s it has operated, it is clear that DL had a very strong relationship with Douglas.

firstmob

Delta picked up a small number of 727-100's from Northeast, I remember flying one from MIA to CVG

tomh009

Since I don't suffer from dry skin or air sickness (and I have figured out that drinking liquids helps reduce dehydration), the seating configuration will trump these tech improvements for me every time.

motytrah

Bet that as it may, both NW and Boeing firmly believe that the new cabin environment will fetch premium fares.

SchmutzigMSP

Relative humidity in-flight is lower than the world's dryest deserts. On high-altitude longer range flights, humidity can approach 1%. That's not natural. If the 787 reaches its proposed levels of increased humidity, the flying experience for all (even those who wisely drink copious amounts of liquid) will be vastly improved over previous aircraft models.

Here's a little fact sheet Boeing put out:
http://www.boeing.com/news/feature/aa2006/787_cabin.pdf

As I mentioned earlier, since no one has announced just exactly how they'll configure the 787, the only thing we can really go on is what Boeing will be providing "standard", that is the inherent features of the 787, and compare that to the 777/A330 families.

florin

IIRC, SQ charged extra for SIN-SYD A380 flights (I don't know if they still do it). That tells me that some people have been willing to fork up more cash to fly more comfortably and/or maybe for the thrill of flying on an A380.

I think that says something about pax valuing the plane they fly. (I personally would pay a little more for a long flight on a nicer plane.) We're talking about long haul flights here, not puddle jumps. Although there are no real comparisons between comfort levels in a 787 vs a 777 yet, the perception alone may make a difference.

An airline may be able to commend higher fares for the same route if using a 787. I know there are other numbers to consider, but this may tip the RASM/CASM ratio a bit.

3Cforme

Let's see if that premium is durable over time. I would also like to see it maintained by other airlines (so it's not just an SQ service premium, but clearly an aircraft premium) before arguing it's possible in a 787 vs. 777 comparison.

As another poster noted, seat width is going to beat relative humidity (and window area) for me every time.

respectable_man

I don't think people care that much who ordered first. NW would have been the N.A. launch customer, and would certainly have made a fanfare of it.

Presumably that's part of the discount you get a launch customer.

Well... we'll see. I am of the opinion that there are much more important things to get right in the next few years than integrating a new plane type.

SchmutzigMSP

What will NW (DL) configure the seat width to be on the 787? And how does it compare with the 777/A330 etc.?

The answer is we don't know. So I think people should stop dismissing the known improvements over all other a/c types (humidity, window size, lighting, turbulence avoidance system, etc.) for measurements that likely won't be all that different from what's currently in the air. I mean, do you really think NW (DL), CO, AA, or anyone else is going to install 16" coach seats or 30" pitch on this aircraft?

I think it's a very safe assumption that the dimensions will be comparable to -- if not better than -- what's currently available.

pbarnette

If NW actually believed that, then it is no wonder they were takeover bait. They might have been able to fetch a premium by expanding point-to-point, but they would have had to really, really step up their game to attract a premium based upon product.

When my wife flew this route a few months ago (when SQ was the only A380 game in town), the premium was less than $200 for a J seat. Pricing out Y tickets recently on QF, there was no difference in pricing for A380 vs 747 from Europe to SIN.

My understanding is that the premium that SQ charges is for the seat, not for the plane. When they first introduced the FF mileage premium for the A380, they charged the same premium for the 777s with the flat bed seat.

NOLAnwGOLD

Well given the 5% cut for 2009 in international capacity, doubt they'll need any new planes for a little while....

motytrah

+1. There's a lot of rumors on a Premium Y on the 787. We'll never know what NW was going to do. DL will have to decide how they want to fit it in. The only thing we do know is the first plane goes to DTW.

Step up their game? You mean like buying a fleet of 787s? Buying a new generation of lie flat seats instead of using the current WBC product? NW put a lot of time and money into scoring new routes and new hard product.

3Cforme

No, it's not safe to assume that. There are responsible parties cited as remarking that a majority of airlines with 787s on order have decided on 9-across seating in coach, rather than 8-across that Boeing had originally advocated. The economics are compelling for airlines. The ergonomics for passengers (especially corn-fed Americans) will not be.

It's an interesting intellectual exercise to dismiss reliable information one doesn't like. This seldoms leads to better quality analysis.

pbarnette

Yep. Do you honestly think that a flat-bed seat will be enough to achieve a revenue premium? NW would have to install the flat-beds, improve in-flight service, start from scratch on the food, and invest serious money into their lounge product just to get to the level that the other flat-bed carriers are at today. And I do not expect those other carriers to sit still.