Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Delta looking at aircraft for 744/763ER fleet replacements

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Delta looking at aircraft for 744/763ER fleet replacements

    Well this was coming at some point. Delta's CEO really seems to be interested in the 330NEO for its trans-Atlantic routes, and some trans-Pacific routes as well.

    Source: ATW Online

    Some of his comments seem peculiar however. The 777X is an "experimental airplane?" It's definitely not in-production or finalized yet, but it is based on existing technology, save for the all-new composite wing. When I think of experimental airplanes I think of something like the Boeing 2707 or the Sonic Cruiser - those were indeed experimental. The 777X on the other hand will pick up where the current generation of 777s left off.

    Also, "...the 737-700 is not economical" - I'm guessing he meant for certain routes it is not economical (which goes for every plane for that matter, since for every plane there are always going to be certain routes where it is not economical).

  • #2
    Granted, his diction is pretty sloppy... but I think people are reading way too much into this.

    1) They still have 77L options (that can be converted into 77W should they need more capacity)... so they're in no rush whatsoever to look at the 779. Does that mean they wont be, in say 2018, 2020, etc? No.

    2) The 73Gs were purchased for pretty specific airports (e.g., SXM, SNA, TGU) and used elsewhere in the interim. Pretty sure he means "inefficient as a systemwide 120seater" not just outright inefficient. Otherwise, why keep them? WN would love them at the right price, and IINM, DL bought them in cash, so can charge whatever they want, if they chose to divest.
    Us, lighting a living horse on fire:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dH2_Q3oJPeU

    Check it out!

    Comment


    • #3
      ^True, DL has the option of going with the 77W in the short-term if need be. I was thinking of the 779 since it being dubbed as a 744 replacement, but of course the trend these days is toward smaller widebodies. Like you said though it can look at that later. DL has been of the "wait-and-see" type when it comes to new planes.

      Comment


      • #4
        Exactly. This is the airline that prefers lightly used MD90s + 767s, and also new orders of the proven 739ER, A321, and A330...

        ...to any of the glittering options on the market, such as 737MAX, A32xNEO, 787, A350, 777-X, etc.

        And did they mention that they just made a damn near $2-Billion profit? Seems they know what they're doing.

        **************

        It's well within DL's M.O. to wait on the latter aforementioned models. I wouldn't be surprised at all to see them order 77Ws, a model that's proven itself a thousand times over, and only later in the next decade go for the 779.

        There's another highly successful airline too, that closely models DL's fleet strategy, though people rarely seem to notice it: CX.

        They'll probably never launch another aircraft again, after their semi-disastrous launch-customer effort on the 773A. They seem more than happy to stick it out with A330s and current 777s, until the newer ships have proven themselves. Can't really blame them.
        Us, lighting a living horse on fire:
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dH2_Q3oJPeU

        Check it out!

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by ConcordeBoy View Post
          Exactly. This is the airline that prefers lightly used MD90s + 767s, and also new orders of the proven 739ER, A321, and A330...

          ...to any of the glittering options on the market, such as 737MAX, A32xNEO, 787, A350, 777-X, etc.

          And did they mention that they just made a damn near $2-Billion profit? Seems they know what they're doing.

          **************

          It's well within DL's M.O. to wait on the latter aforementioned models. I wouldn't be surprised at all to see them order 77Ws, a model that's proven itself a thousand times over, and only later in the next decade go for the 779.

          There's another highly successful airline too, that closely models DL's fleet strategy, though people rarely seem to notice it: CX.

          They'll probably never launch another aircraft again, after their semi-disastrous launch-customer effort on the 773A. They seem more than happy to stick it out with A330s and current 777s, until the newer ships have proven themselves. Can't really blame them.
          ...and to add, this is quite successful at having a shot at a great price when DL actually comes around to order. Sure, they might have to wait a while to arrive at the aircraft, but considering the issues surrounding the A380 (at inception) as well as the 787 (since birth...), now that you mention it - it's a sound strategy.

          In a case such as this, though - why take this oppurtunity to critique the 737-700, or even discuss that you're probably going to go with more A330s? Just to snap Boeing into more discounts?
          Whatever is necessary, is never unwise.

          Comment


          • #6
            ^You have a point there, this might be a case of "poking" Boeing to get its attention. From what I gather it's also a tactic used by other CEOs as well.

            What's this "-300A" variant? I had never heard of it till now, is it the same as the base -300?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Foxtrot View Post
              ^True, DL has the option of going with the 77W in the short-term if need be. I was thinking of the 779 since it being dubbed as a 744 replacement, but of course the trend these days is toward smaller widebodies.
              Whereas the 778 and 779 are bigger than existing T7 models. Also isn't the 748 a "744 replacement"?

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by mpe View Post
                Whereas the 778 and 779 are bigger than existing T7 models.
                Yes, but in an effort to make 777-200 customers head to the 787 line, and 777-300 and 747 customers moving towards the 778 and 779.

                Originally posted by mpe View Post
                Also isn't the 748 a "744 replacement"?
                Yes, it is, but an anemic ordering environment, as well as perhaps a flawed product - have made the 747-8I a choice that very few carriers have made. The world is moving towards twin-engined aircraft due to their efficiency.
                Whatever is necessary, is never unwise.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Foxtrot View Post
                  What's this "-300A" variant? I had never heard of it till now, is it the same as the base -300?
                  Its official name is still 777-300 (launched in the late '90s by CX), but its colloquially called the 773A due to its design for the "A-market"... which itself is an unofficial designation that arose between Boeing and several airlines in the "Working Together" program, that eventually spawned the 777.

                  You'd also sometimes see the terms 772A, 772B, 772C, in reference to the 777-200, 777-200IGW/777-200ER, 777-200LR.... but these has largely fallen out of use, even for unofficial shorthand on internet boards.

                  Here's a basic recap
                  A Market: 300 seats @ 3,900 to 5,200 nautical miles
                  - Lobbied by UA, AA, and others looking for a DC-10-30 replacement for heavy domestic routes, Hawaii routes, etc.
                  - AA also lobbied that this aircraft should fit into the DC-10 footprint, leading Boeing to offer folding wingtips. When AA decided not to take 772A, the feature died on the vine
                  - Led to 777-200

                  B Market: 300 seats @ 5,800 to 7,700 nautical miles
                  - Lobbied by majority of customers, in particular UA and BA
                  - Led to growth variant of 777-200 with MTOW hike and extra fuel capacity (i.e. 777-200IGW i.e. 777-200ER)

                  C Market: 270 seats @ 8,000 nautical miles and beyond
                  - Lobbied by QF, to date the only "Working Together" customer not to order the 777
                  - At the time, the initial PW4000, GE90, and T800 variants were technological marvels and it wasn't expected that super-powerful variants would be available in the future. This led Boeing to market on a shrink of the 772ER for a ultra-longhaul airplane. Other gizmo's like a thrust-providing APU (quasi-Trijet) were proposed
                  - Led to Boeing leaving a spot for the 777-100 open
                  - In 2000, when GE and Rolls Royce began demonstrating sufficent engine power for the 777LR, this led Boeing to offer the 777-200LR, a further MTOW hike and fuel increase from the -200ER.
                  Us, lighting a living horse on fire:
                  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dH2_Q3oJPeU

                  Check it out!

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X