questions From Australia, joined Sep 2011, 305 posts, RR: 0 Posted (8 months 4 weeks ago) and read 8503 times:
With DL's planned delivery of the 787 in 2020, will the airline find itself behind others in developing long and thin routes? In Asia will it be tied to using its NRT hub vs having the ability to overfly? Globally, what routes provide the biggest opportunity for DL that it will lose out on because it waited too late to take delivery of the 787? With recent 787 cancellations, is it possible/probably/likely DL will take earlier deliveries of the 787? Is SkyTeam behind Star Alliance and oneworld in taking delivery of the 787 or on par?
Coronado From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 1000 posts, RR: 2 Reply 1, posted (8 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 8223 times:
With oil at 100USD/bar the 787 will inevitably just become a 767 replacement. Whether you call them long thin routes or ultra long haul routes I don't see much of a future for them. More global hubs allowing aircraft to not be burdened with using fuel to carry fuel unfortunately means most new announced long thin routes IMHO will fade away within two years. The compelling cost advantage of putting a 787 on existing profitable 767 routes I think will overcome any considerations of trying to get a revenue premium on experimental new overflight routings.
The Original Coronado: First CV jet flights RG CV 990 July 1965; DL CV 880 July 1965; Spantax CV990 Feb 1973
CuriousFlyer From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 653 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (8 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 8057 times:
This would mean that DL would lose a lot of money on their 767 routes because they would be facing UA and AA's 787s?
SANFan From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 4719 posts, RR: 15 Reply 3, posted (8 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 8057 times:
Continuing along the lines of Coronado's post, given the economy -- or lack thereof -- that exists currently in most places I think the potential for the 787 opening a lot of new, thin, long routes will be minimized. There will be some plucking of the low hanging fruit (which has already begun) but I just don't see DL missing out on much. Who knows, perhaps by the time DL starts to receive the DreamLiner, the economic climate will be more stable and there might be some routes ready to support new service at that time. It's all about timing!
I keep seeing thread after thread talking about how small cities are expecting (hoping) to see nonstop intercontinental routes soon. The game has indeed changed with this amazing new airplane, and others to follow, but you still need a viable market to tap into in a time of expensive fuel and other costs. The cx with the 787 will start a handful of new routes -- in very carefully studied markets -- and the remainder of the new planes will probably just replace older, less fuel-efficient models.
GCT64 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2007, 1104 posts, RR: 1 Reply 5, posted (8 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 7949 times:
Quoting CuriousFlyer (Reply 2): This would mean that DL would lose a lot of money on their 767 routes because they would be facing UA and AA's 787s?
DL will be paying more for the fuel for the trip (than UA/AA) but less for the aircraft (than UA/AA) [in depreciation/financing]. DL will know precisely how those relative pluses/minuses add up.
mayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 9175 posts, RR: 14 Reply 6, posted (8 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 7843 times:
Quoting GCT64 (Reply 5):
DL will be paying more for the fuel for the trip (than UA/AA) but less for the aircraft (than UA/AA) [in depreciation/financing].
Perhaps DL's refinery will offset that.
"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
Deltal1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 8577 posts, RR: 8 Reply 7, posted (8 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 7712 times:
Not right now. Economy is just going to make a the 767 replacement. The only thing the 787 would do for Delta now is give them the chance to down grade 777/747 routes. (I think you would see much like you have seen with UA. maybe a new route or too but mostly replacing aircraft)
"Oh look at the sUGAr falling out of the sky! Look at the sUGAr falling out of the sky!" LM 1922-2011 Go Dawgs! G.A.T.A.
centrair From Japan, joined Jan 2005, 3597 posts, RR: 21 Reply 8, posted (8 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 5313 times:
If we look at what JL, NH and UA are doing so far it is secondary hub to major hub or major secondary city to major hub.
UA: Denver to Tokyo (NH is also looking at this)
JL: Boston to Tokyo
IMO, for Skyteam there are several things to keep in mind for Asia.
1) KE is the largest carrier by routes in the region. The more connections with ICN the better.
2) DL seems to be moving conservatively when it comes to expanding in Asia.
In 8 years, the 787 might have a -10. This might be something DL will need. They can then replace 767s and older 772s with 787 of all three types. They have enough options and I think a strategy for using them.
767s - 787-8 / 787-9
772s - 787-9 / 787-10
This allows not only expansion in Asia but network wide including South America and Africa.
P.S. been away from A.Net for a long time. Feel free to correct me.
Yes...I am not a KIX fan. Let's Japanese Aviation!
lightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 10649 posts, RR: 100 Reply 9, posted (8 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 5255 times:
It all depends on one's assumptions of oil prices. I personally believe we'll continue to grow.
The part DL will be hardest hit will be in Asia. NRT will continue to decline in importance. With the 787, ICN, PEK, PVG and others will see new connections that will bypass existing routes. DL could either be part of that... or not. The 787 will enable quite a few new routes from ICN. Some into the American SouthEast that will compete with DL.
Quoting centrair (Reply 8): In 8 years, the 787 might have a -10.
Proposed range of the 787-10 will be shorter than what DL needs. I see the 789 being the primary model.
IndianicWorld From Australia, joined Jun 2001, 2403 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (8 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 5200 times:
Quoting Coronado (Reply 1): With oil at 100USD/bar the 787 will inevitably just become a 767 replacement. Whether you call them long thin routes or ultra long haul routes I don't see much of a future for them. More global hubs allowing aircraft to not be burdened with using fuel to carry fuel unfortunately means most new announced long thin routes IMHO will fade away within two years. The compelling cost advantage of putting a 787 on existing profitable 767 routes I think will overcome any considerations of trying to get a revenue premium on experimental new overflight routings.
+1
Something I've also been saying for quite a while now.
boilerla From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 261 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (8 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 4804 times:
Quoting Max Q (Reply 11): The 787 is a great 767 replacement and can open up a few new routes but that's not where all the revenue is.
The big money is on trunk routes between major cities and this requires 777-300 or above sized Aircraft.
Why do you think that just because it's a trunk route that it requires a 773? The thing that UA and others are finding is that the 777 is too much plane, especially October-March, and even if you can ill it, oil makes it expensive to operate.
Example is UA switching LAX-PVG. A huge market with two major O&D cities, but in the winter it can't be filled reliably unless without some junk fares on the market. Switching it to a 788 allows UA to command a higher premium, reduce capacity, and reduce CASM. Win win all around.
Quoting centrair (Reply 8):
If we look at what JL, NH and UA are doing so far it is secondary hub to major hub or major secondary city to major hub.
UA: Denver to Tokyo (NH is also looking at this)
JL: Boston to Tokyo
UA has lots of potential routes like this. With LatAm traffic exploding, and China growing, there are lots of routes to secondary hubs that can be served.
Max Q From United States of America, joined May 2001, 3289 posts, RR: 19 Reply 13, posted (8 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 4708 times:
Quoting boilerla (Reply 12):
Why do you think that just because it's a trunk route that it requires a 773? The thing that UA and others are finding is that the 777 is too much plane, especially October-March, and even if you can ill it, oil makes it expensive to operate.
As a United employee I can tell you with great certainty, with our current management we are driving so many people away we will be lucky to fill a 737 on any of these trunk routes !
'Too much plane' is a self fulfilling prophecy and an excuse for weak management that has p**ed off so many passengers they won't return.
Example is UA switching LAX-PVG. A huge market with two major O&D cities, but in the winter it can't be filled reliably unless without some junk fares on the market. Switching it to a 788 allows UA to command a higher premium, reduce capacity, and reduce CASM. Win win all around.
Nonsense, see above, UA is the biggest airline in the world competing with the best Airlines in the Pacific. You don't see them using small Aircraft to connect major cities because they don't have to.
UA needs to fix their operation, not scale it down in the hope they can have a bigger slice of a smaller pie.
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
PPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8492 posts, RR: 43 Reply 15, posted (8 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3033 times:
Quoting Max Q (Reply 11): The big money is on trunk routes between major cities and this requires 777-300 or above sized Aircraft.
Quoting Max Q (Reply 13): 'Too much plane' is a self fulfilling prophecy and an excuse for weak management that has p**ed off so many passengers they won't return.
Big trunk routes won't make the airline any money if they have too much capacity. . . they will still make the pilots plenty of money, especially if they upgrade from 767/787 to 773!
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
point2point From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 1959 posts, RR: 1 Reply 16, posted (8 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 2490 times:
Quoting centrair (Reply 8): UA: Denver to Tokyo (NH is also looking at this)
I'm a bit confused with this. Is that which is in parenthesis here stating that NH also wants to get into the NRT-DEN market? If so, it would be great for DEN. However, with UA already in the market (well, soon entering it), I just don't see enough traffic with 2 carriers. It's even going to be a bit of a stretch on this route for UA by themselves here, with 22, 619 O&D pax per year between the two, or about a guesstimated 31 pax of the roughly 220 seats or so on each leg of the 787 flight, there is a lot of filling of seats to do. Even with the convenience of the n/s here probably adding a few bodies to the O&D here, this flight will still be mostly filled with connects. And not to fear, since I think that I recall Smisek stating that UA's other U.S./Tokyo flights would now be concentrating on the premium O&D traffic, DEN's role will be geared for the connects.
I will say that the City of Denver and DEN has been actively in the past (10 years or so) been doing all that they could to acquire this DEN-NRT nonstop, and NH was somewhat the presumed carrier if the route ever materialized. But now since that DEN found a way to provide UA with $22M, UA in return decided that they would fly this route.
With all of the above, I hardly see any room for NH here, eh? Beside, since UA and NH have anti-trust and revenue sharing here, it's all the same flight anyway........
N62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3671 posts, RR: 4 Reply 17, posted (8 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 2363 times:
Quoting Coronado (Reply 1): More global hubs allowing aircraft to not be burdened with using fuel to carry fuel unfortunately means most new announced long thin routes IMHO will fade away within two years
Roseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 8737 posts, RR: 52 Reply 18, posted (8 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 2305 times:
The 787 could help them in some areas, but they have such a diverse fleet, it really isn't needed that much. There are very few routes in DL's network that need the 787 range that they can't already cover.
The A332 and 763ERs have quite a bit of range. They can make routes like SEA-PEK with a 767 since DL has such high TOW 763ERs.
There are a few A332 and 763ER routes that are weight restricted such as DTW-HND. It can be argued that DL should never be operating DTW-HND in the first place.
The 787 is very useful with long thin routes, but DL operates essentially every airplane made, they can balance their fleet well enough. The one area is fuel burn, but Delta has decided that low acquisition costs is worth a fuel burn penalty hence getting 717s over C-series or E195s, MD90s over 738s, etc.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
point2point From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 1959 posts, RR: 1 Reply 19, posted (8 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 2227 times:
Since ideally long and thin is what the 787 does, and this is where DL would decide to make use here, I could see some possible MSP and SLC routes open up with these smaller two hubs (at least in terms of long and thin) here that are most likely here to stay, and also some other markets from the bigger hubs of ATL, DTW, JFK and LAX.
SLC could maybe see the return of NRT, and then maybe AMS (hub) or LHR (practical)
MSP could maybe see FRA or ICN.
DTW could maybe see SVO or TLV.
LAX could maybe see NGO, KIX, BOM or EZE
JFK could maybe see BOM, DEL, EZE, or SLC
ATL..... anything goes here.......
Just some options that I'm thinking out loud about here.....
centrair From Japan, joined Jan 2005, 3597 posts, RR: 21 Reply 20, posted (8 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1677 times:
Quoting point2point (Reply 16): I'm a bit confused with this. Is that which is in parenthesis here stating that NH also wants to get into the NRT-DEN market? If so, it would be great for DEN. However, with UA already in the market (well, soon entering it), I just don't see enough traffic with 2 carriers.
Originally when NH took the 787, one route they stated was NRT-DEN. I have not heard that they will not do this. I doubt they will and instead will look to connect secondary Japanese cities to Star hubs ie NGO-ORD. NRT has limited space for expansion and HND has limited hours. This leaves using NGO and KIX with connections to NRT and HND.
One other route NH stated many years ago and got some Japanese press was NGO-SEA specifically for aerospace and tech industries.
Those are possibilities. Especially BOM and EZE.
I think that at some point DL will change DTW-NGO-MNL from a 744 to a 777 and add a 787 LAX-NGO flight which connects to the NGO-MNL section. The DTW-NGO is all about automotive and aerospace but the MNL part is mostly cheap seats. It could end up the other way though 777 on LAX-NGO and 787 on DTW-NGO.
When JL ordered the 787, one of their stated desires was to relaunch NGO-LAX. NGO had a boom of North American routes in 2005 when the new airport opened but soon dropped off. We had AA with ORD-NGO and UA SFO-NGO. Both are possible 787 routes for Star and OneWorld.
Yes...I am not a KIX fan. Let's Japanese Aviation!
legacyins From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 1827 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (8 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1594 times:
If they are still on it, I could see DL use the 787 on their SFO-NRT route.
point2point From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 1959 posts, RR: 1 Reply 23, posted (8 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1143 times:
Quoting mayor (Reply 22): Uh, don't we already fly JFK-SLC?
Sponsor Message: 
From Australia, joined Sep 2011, 305 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 1000 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2007, 1104 posts, 
From Japan, joined Jan 2005, 3597 posts, 
From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8492 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
