Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
NWA's Fleet Renewal  
User currently offlineCentrair From Japan, joined Jan 2005, 3598 posts, RR: 20
Posted (6 years 11 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 2764 times:

I was looking at the NW Investor Presentation from September 19, 2007.

Investor Presentation from September 19, 2007 (PDF)

Page 12 compares seats, revenue and cost between the following:
A330-3 vs DC10
76-st RJ vs DC9
B787-8 vs 747-4

The graph on page 14 shows the 747-4 (not -400), 787-8 and 787-9.

The center is DTW of course but the edges and cities listed are interesting.

The 787-8 which has amazing range, has PVG, BOM, and DEL on the edge.
The 787-9 which NW has not ordered, has TPE, HKG, and JNB on the edge.
There are other cities which all fall under the 747-4.

Does this means that NW will not be flying DTW-HKG with a 787-8 but be requiring a 787-9?
UA can fly ORD-HKG with a 747-4(00) why can't NW?

I don't know what to make of it, but makes me wonder why they are comparing the EMB175 to the DC-9 and show the 787-9.


Yes...I am not a KIX fan. Let's Japanese Aviation!
6 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineAf773atmsp From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 2675 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (6 years 11 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 2749 times:

Quoting Centrair (Thread starter):

Possible order for 787-9s or changing some of their 787-8 options to 787-9s.  scratchchin  What about comparing the Bombardier C Series to the DC-9 (I'm guessing they're not comparing these two aircraft because the C Series hasn't been made yet).



It ain't no normal MD80 its a Super 80!
User currently offlineBurnsie28 From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 7539 posts, RR: 8
Reply 2, posted (6 years 11 months 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 2546 times:

Quoting Centrair (Thread starter):
UA can fly ORD-HKG with a 747-4(00) why can't NW?

They do it with restrictions.

Quoting Centrair (Thread starter):
I don't know what to make of it, but makes me wonder why they are comparing the EMB175 to the DC-9 and show the 787-9.

Right now the E175 is the only aircraft that is "somewhat" replacing some DC-9 routes, thats why. 787-9 is an option for NW.



"Some People Just Know How To Fly"- Best slogan ever, RIP NW 1926-2009
User currently offlineZL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (6 years 11 months 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 2515 times:

Quoting Centrair (Thread starter):
UA can fly ORD-HKG with a 747-4(00) why can't NW?

UA's 744 has 347 seats, while NW's has 403.


User currently offlineDL767captain From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2539 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (6 years 11 months 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 2478 times:

So they are wanting to replace their 744s with 787s? I know NW only has two classes but it seems like they are already filling a 744 so why would they go down to a 787 on high capacity routes? It seems like they would be looking at the 748 or at least the larger A350s for the 744 routes. And they are comparing a 200 seat 788 to a 403 seat 744, the 788 doesn't look like it goes that much further with only half the seats

User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21511 posts, RR: 60
Reply 5, posted (6 years 11 months 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 2444 times:

Quoting DL767captain (Reply 4):
So they are wanting to replace their 744s with 787s? I know NW only has two classes but it seems like they are already filling a 744 so why would they go down to a 787 on high capacity routes?

Because as Zvezda and I have been trying to explain for quite a while, there is no need to always replace a VLA with a VLA or even an "LA". 2 787-9s can carry more cargo and pax than 1 VLA, and provide flexibility to boot. Only routes with slot limits would make this harder to accomplish. And yes, routes with limited frequency due to bi-laterals, but as the world is opened up to open skies, it wouldn't make a lot of sense to bet on limited frequencies for the next 20 years at this point. Airlines can always invest more in VLAs later if it turns out they need more, but not only does that defer the cost into the future, but allows the airline to buy the "latest greatest" version of the VLA in question.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineMaersk737 From Denmark, joined Feb 2004, 702 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (6 years 11 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2413 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 5):
Because as Zvezda and I have been trying to explain for quite a while, there is no need to always replace a VLA with a VLA or even an "LA". 2 787-9s can carry more cargo and pax than 1 VLA, and provide flexibility to boot.

You really take the credit for a lot of things, don't you?  Wink

Cheers

Peter



I'm not proud to be a Viking, just thankfull
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
ATW: SN CEO On Fleet Renewal posted Mon Jun 11 2007 07:25:55 by Manni
OA Fleet Renewal? posted Thu May 10 2007 14:27:12 by SergioAEE
Aerosvit Fleet Renewal posted Tue May 8 2007 12:29:49 by Flying-Tiger
BA Long-Haul Fleet Renewal - More Detail posted Fri Dec 29 2006 16:51:25 by Crosswind
LOT Fleet Renewal Questions posted Wed Dec 20 2006 17:18:37 by Cancidas
Lufthansa Regional Fleet Renewal ::: Any News posted Wed Nov 8 2006 11:27:03 by Dougbr2006
AC Jazz Fleet Renewal posted Mon Sep 11 2006 05:35:08 by ACJAZZAME
PR To Focus On Fleet Renewal, Emerging Markets posted Thu Aug 31 2006 05:09:15 by N751PR
Aviacsa's Fleet Renewal! posted Sat Aug 12 2006 05:39:00 by Ghost77
BA: Fleet Renewal Update posted Thu Aug 3 2006 07:03:57 by Scotron11