SchmutzigMSP

If (yes, if) the NW/DL 787 goes to nine across, that would indicate roughly 17.2" seating, the same as the current 747-400 coach configuration. The A330 has 17.5" and DL 777s are 18" with their 764s being 17-18" in coach.

I'm not declaring coach in the 747-400 to be the pinnacle of comfort, but I would say if the 787 seats ended up being 17.2", that would be comparable to what's currently available. Isn't that what I said above? Doesn't that sound like a safe assumption?

But again, the talk about nine abreast is speculation based on some PR speak from Boeing over a year ago saying 65% of their customers were headed in that direction. Where are the customers headed today? And where will they be headed when the time actually comes to install the seats? That's what I'm interested in.

And who's to say that DL wouldn't go ahead an install the Cozy Suites in coach on this aircraft where they could get away with "narrower" seats while still providing a better customer experience than what's currently available?

So, seating configuration is obviously up in the air and ripe for speculation. Why not get back to discussing the actual benefits that ALL 787 aircraft will provide over anything currently flying? Those are hard facts, not speculation and fearing-the-worst talk.

motytrah

Huh? New Hard Product + Better Cabin Environment + New Routes = Premium. NW's stated goal, said personally to me by a NW 787 team member, is premium revenue. The only valid point you have is other carriers aren't going to sit still while NW/DL wait for Boeing to get it's act together. The rest of your issues are based on how your experience with a soft product that hasn't happened yet. I'm still scratching my head about the lounge comment. Have you ever seen the World Clubs at NRT or DTW?

DHAST

Well, I don't "suffer" from those afflictions either, but I can tell you a couple of things.

When I lived in Los Angeles, I was a Platinum for two years and a silver for two more. Routings being what they are, every time I took a trip, I was on a plane for 4 or more hours. I found that I was coming down with mild head colds with much more frequency than I used to or have since.

I recently took a trip to the Indian sub-continent. On the way out, my throat was so dry and irritated, that I was constantly sucking down water. On the way back, upon return to the US, I caught a pretty good head cold again.

When I do this short domestic stuff, I don't feel a thing. If the 787 provides a more comfortable cabin environment, I welcome it.

SchmutzigMSP

They are most likely comparing it to the LH or SQ F lounges or something else equally unreasonable and unfair.

orlandodlplat

Maybe that was the original thinking, but in this environment it's simply hogwash.

Almost all passengers (even business passengers in this day and age) choose a flight based on price. They do not choose because the airplane offers bigger windows or might be more humid inside. These are not legitimate sales points.

The reality is that DL is standardizing its product; a 787 will no doubt offer the same hard product (seats, IFE, etc) as the 772 and the 764, and even the 744 and A330. And I'm sure that 772s ordered today will arrive with similar advances in interior environment.

The question for DL moving forward is how it best equips its fleet to achieve the international expansion it needs RIGHT NOW. 772s have been very cost-effective, and they have the added benefit that passengers really like them.

Why on earth should DL delay its plans for an aircraft that's as yet untested, and doesn't offer the capacity of the planes it actually wants?

SchmutzigMSP

I'm consistently amazed at those willing to dismiss rather revolutionary enhancements in aircraft design without ever stepping foot on the aircraft. Give it the benefit of the doubt.

As for legitimate selling points, I would argue that they are just as legitimate as direct Porsche limousine service to the aircraft or pre-ordering Lobster Thermidor before you leave.

When price points are equal (which more often than not they are, +/- a slight amount), you then select based on a number of subjective features. Large windows and a more comfortable atmosphere sure as heck can be included in that mix. IMHO, of course...

orlandodlplat

I was responding to the point someone made that the former NW had been hoping to charge a premium for its 787 flights. That's what I called hogwash. Fares have always been - and will always be - set based on competition, not airplane architecture.

No doubt the 787 will be a cool plane to ride... for those of us FTers who do choose based on aircraft type. Most passengers, however, choose based on price and schedule. Most passengers don't know or care what type of plane on which they're travelling.

DL management is on record that they like the 787 and are looking forward to building it into the fleet. There is no guarantee when that wouldd happen, however, since the plane is so badly delayed. Furthermore, they also like (actually, they LOVE) the 772. This way they can get more 772s sooner, and get 787s later when its kinks have been worked out.

florin

My point was that people do care about the comfort of the plane they fly. I though it was a premium for flying on an A380, but pbarnette pointed out that it was likely a premium for the better seat. It still goes to say that people value comfort when it comes to long flights.

The plane wouldn't matter to once-in-a-blue-moon travelers, but a lot of people I know, even somewhat-frequent flyers, do care about the plane when it comes to long flights.

pbarnette

Unreasonable? I don't expect that sort of stuff, but I do think it is a requirement if you are trying to drive a product-based revenue premium.

Besides, I'm simply comparing it to something like BA. Aside from the Heathrow lounges, which offer hot food cooked to order and massages, their outstation lounges are vastly superior to what NW offers at the same sort of locations. Their hub lounges are pleasant places, but they are not up to the standards of most international carriers lounges.

I would think that premium revenue is every legacy airline's stated goal. I am simply disputing that NW need only add lie-flat seats and the 787 to achieve it.

Hasn't happened yet? So I'm supposed to believe that NW was going to successfully pull an about-face when the 787s were delivered? DL started upgrading their on-board service, food, and amenities before they introduced flat beds. Carriers like EK and SQ still try to sell their service, food, etc on routes where they have older hard products.

If NW thinks they can just roll out a new product with the 787 and all will be dandy, they are mistaken. Don't underestimate just how poor NW's reputation is/was - and I don't care whether it was deserved, because the perception was certainly there. I suspect that the hangover from the poor reputations enjoyed by the US carriers will last longer than any bump they might get from the new products, preventing them from achieving the revenue premiums they want.

lseflyer

There were hints from NW of a premium economy class on the 787s. This probably means we have to look to other carriers for that product, not the "new" Delta.

tomh009

I sympathize with you, and for you the humidity may make a bigger difference.

As for me, I will end up the year with over 200K BIS miles, including half a dozen TPAC and TATL each, and numerous trans-continentals, so I know about long flights. And yet I have had a single flu or head cold in the last five years (this summer -- ironically after three weeks of no travel at all!). So I will still look at the seating options and routing first, before worrying about humidity or window size.

All that said, I fully expect to see similar improvements in other new aircraft, like the Airbus A350 and the Bombardier CSeries, so it's unlikely that the 787 will retain its distinction as the "king of humidity" very long.

ClipperDelta

Yes, people do value comfort for long flights, but it depends on how much premium they would have to pay for it. And whether there are enough people out there who put comfort above all else, to make it a big part of your business model.
And judging from past experience in the airline world, there are almost never enough of these kinds of customers to justify any sort of "mass rollout" of a product based on "paying a premium for comfort". Examples:

- AA's MRTC (More Room Throughout Coach) program was a huge favorite with everyone, but yet in the end, not enough people were willing to pay a "premium" (whether that be actually paying more to fly AA or switching their flying to AA) to justify keeping the program; AA is back to 31" pitch in Y now and there is no evidence to suggest there has been a mass defection of travelers from AA because of this comfort issue.

- Delta tried in the '90s to roll-out an international-type Business cabin on their transcons (JFK-LAX/SFO) but ultimately wasn't successful; while the JFK-LAX/SFO market has a large premium following, there simply wasn't enough of this market to spread around three carriers (AA, UA, and DL). Currently, DL offers basically domestic-style seating on its transcons (though with upgraded cabin services) and is now the #2 carrier in the JFK-LAX market after AA.

-If enough people actually were willing to pay a premium for comfort, both UA and NW would have been run out of the transpacific market a long time ago by the likes of SQ or JL. Instead, SQ still has to resort to sales, to bucket-shop travel agencies, etc., to move inventory despite having probably the best Economy Class cabin in the world.

Bottom line is, IMHO, although there IS a market for certain premium services, it is limited. If you're the first one in, and manage to corner that limited market, you will be fine, but most people will not pay extra even for a little bit more comfort.

bk42

This issue of premium revenue props its head in the analysis of a premium economy class, and whether or not NW will/was going to introduce it. How much more money can you actually wring from customers for the extra space and slight service improvements? The cost of P.E. on flights I have had has never been worth to me the significant increase in cost over regular economy. Now is that incremental revenue actually producing a net increase in the bottom line? Would NW see the same increase with its reputation as-is? Hard to say, I've never seen any numbers put out.


I think the best way to look at NW's strategy pre-merger is that they were trying to provide two very different products: WBC would be a premium revenue source, with a very competitive product, while coach would remain your cattle-car class for the most part, just with the 787 new features added. I tend to think that the 8-across decision had more to do with cargo and weight than pax numbers.

My personal viewpoint, with no real sources, is that NW then was to try and hook up new Asian destinations and compete in that premium customer market with its new WBC, establishing itself as the Asia to US connection. (DTW-PVG? SEA-PEK?) I doubt that NW would try and compete for new premium customers in its current route structure alone. I don't think there is enough demand there. Just how successful this strategy would have worked is anyone's guess.

SNAGuy

Maybe this new WSJ report has something to do with it:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1228...=djemalertNEWS




Boeing Co. is considering pushing back the first deliveries of its flagship 787 Dreamliner by at least six more months to account for the recent strike by union machinists, as well as other snags in getting the troubled jetliner airborne.

According to people familiar with the situation, Boeing officials are expected to announce later this month that the first deliveries of the fuel-efficient jet might not occur until as late as summer 2010, more than two years after the jet was originally scheduled to enter service.

The article continues on for a few more paragraphs.

tomh009

Looks like Boeing might yet beat the A380's record delays. There might be just a bit less gloating in Chicago this time around.

Oh yes, the 747-8 is also slipping by six months. And this is before the likely engineering staff strike at Boeing.