cgnnrw
Posts: 1044
Joined: Tue May 17, 2005 3:11 am

DL 394 Change To 757. Why?

Thu Dec 01, 2005 5:45 am

A few weeks ago I booked a r/t ATL-SFO going out on Dec 10 coming back on Dec 14. At the time I booked DL had a 767-200 on the return segment. I just checked the website and discovered it's now a 757 and practically full. If they can fill a 757 wouldn't it be a smart move to try to sell a few more seats and fill the 767? I'm a bit disappointed with the change. I was looking forward to comfy 767 flight. Any DLers out there know why the a/c was switched. Was the scheduled 767 one the a/cs DL decided to get rid of?

Well at least the outbound segment is still showing 767-400 as a/c. Looking forward to that flight.
A330 man.
 
desertjets
Posts: 7563
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2000 3:12 pm

RE: DL 394 Change To 757. Why?

Thu Dec 01, 2005 5:52 am

There is only a 16 seat difference between the 757 and 762. However the 757 seats more in first class vs. the 762. So bear that in mind.
Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia
 
thepilot730
Posts: 72
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 4:36 am

RE: DL 394 Change To 757. Why?

Thu Dec 01, 2005 5:54 am

DL has been selling there 767-200 to ABX so that can be the reason why they have changed the aircraft. Also, today DL received permission from the courts to be able to sell more of their 767 to undisclosed customers. The article can be found at usatoday.com.
 
cgnnrw
Posts: 1044
Joined: Tue May 17, 2005 3:11 am

RE: DL 394 Change To 757. Why?

Thu Dec 01, 2005 6:12 am

Thanks for the replies. I know this topic has been beaten to death but I'm one of those "weirdos" that prefers a wide-body a/c on any flight longer than 2.5 hours. I know, I know, I know its all in the mind but that's just how I feel.

I would not have guessed the actual difference in pax is only 16....I never really counted to be honest. I hate math.... I am surprised to learn a 757 has more biz seats than the 767-200.....I just assumed a 767 is always much bigger than a 757.....never too old to learn, huh.

I just hope and pray DL doesn't subsitute the 767-400 on the ATL-SFO route. I've read great things about it and have wanted to try one out for a long time.
A330 man.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26467
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: DL 394 Change To 757. Why?

Thu Dec 01, 2005 7:16 am

Quoting Cgnnrw (Reply 3):
I would not have guessed the actual difference in pax is only 16....I never really counted to be honest. I hate math.... I am surprised to learn a 757 has more biz seats than the 767-200.....I just assumed a 767 is always much bigger than a 757.....never too old to learn, huh.

Weightwise, the 762 is heavier than the 752, but it is not that much bigger when it comes to passenger capacity. The FAA max for the 752 is 239 seats while the 762 is 290, but you can only get more than say 250-255 in a 762 if you go beyond the 2-3-2 design configuration and go 2-4-2. The 762A's advantage is a major one in cargo carriage and a small one in range
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
DL WIDGET HEAD
Posts: 1469
Joined: Wed Apr 12, 2000 8:18 am

RE: DL 394 Change To 757. Why?

Thu Dec 01, 2005 7:42 am

Quoting DesertJets (Reply 1):
There is only a 16 seat difference between the 757 and 762. However the 757 seats more in first class vs. the 762. So bear that in mind.

Actually, there is a 21 seat difference. On DL's mainline 757 the capacity is 183 (22F / 161Y) and the capacity on the 762 is 204 (18F / 186Y). Still, not all that different.
 
1011
Posts: 270
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2001 11:30 am

RE: DL 394 Change To 757. Why?

Thu Dec 01, 2005 8:43 am

I'd be pretty pissed off if my 762 was changed to a 757. I pick my flights by the plane type and try to almost always get a widebody. I won't fly transcon on any narrowbody unless I really have to.

It seems like DL is changing more and more 767 flights at the last min to 757s. That has been the case out of SAN. We had one change from a 763 to a 757 this past summer. It could be worse. We picked a 744 flight this summer from DEN to SFO on UA. We took that trip just to fly on the 744 and UA switched it to a 757. Talk about a big downgrade.
 
OOer
Posts: 920
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 2:10 pm

RE: DL 394 Change To 757. Why?

Thu Dec 01, 2005 8:47 am

The 767-400 you fly on from ATL to SFO will not ne switched...as it continues to HNL after SFO...unless they cancel that flight...the 764 isnt going anywhere!!!
 
RiddlePilot215
Posts: 280
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 2:19 pm

RE: DL 394 Change To 757. Why?

Thu Dec 01, 2005 8:56 am

Quoting 1011 (Reply 6):
It seems like DL is changing more and more 767 flights at the last min to 757s. That has been the case out of SAN. We had one change from a 763 to a 757 this past summer. It could be worse. We picked a 744 flight this summer from DEN to SFO on UA. We took that trip just to fly on the 744 and UA switched it to a 757. Talk about a big downgrade.

Well think about it this way, would you prefer your favorite airline to keep flying planes that give their routes ridiculous over capacity, thereby keeping them in the RED, or would you rather have them make a more economical move, and fly a smaller aircraft, with CONSIDERABLY better gas milage do the job, and you can fly the for the forseeable future?

The 744 on UA's SFO-DEN route was ridiculous...It was only done to keep the utilization rates higher on the widebodies, to ATTEMPT at keeping their costs down.

In my personal opinion I don't mind flying on a smaller aircraft on transcon routes. The job is still being done, you're going from point A to B, quickly, SAFELY, and in reasonable comfort...Oh that, and it's damn near impossible to make a profit flying widebodies  Smile . Only reason why airlines like Emirates, Gulf Air, Qatar Airways, Singapore(you get the point) make money is A) Their fares are through the roof, and B) It's a gimme for the middle eastern airlines...their gas is CONSIDERABLY cheaper.
God is good, all the time. All the time, God is good.
 
Kahala777
Posts: 1513
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 7:28 am

RE: DL 394 Change To 757. Why?

Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:27 am

Quoting RiddlePilot215 (Reply 8):
The 744 on UA's SFO-DEN route was ridiculous...It was only done to keep the utilization rates higher on the widebodies, to ATTEMPT at keeping their costs down.

The 747-400 on Los Angeles to Denver, San Francisco to Denver, and Chicago to Denver were all done in the past and were concurrent with the Ski season, which is big money in Colorado..

If you want to talk about waste look at:

United Airlines and their past utilization of the 747-400, 767-300 to Las Vegas from Chicago, and 767-300 from Phoenix to Chicago.

KAHALA777
 
AirCop
Posts: 5553
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 2:39 am

RE: DL 394 Change To 757. Why?

Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:04 am

Speaking of waste: Delta use to operate L-1011's and 767's between SFO and LAX in the early 80's at that time my prefer way to travel between the two cities since the planes were never full. Some of us remember PSA's attempt with the Tristar between those two cities, United operated a 747 between San Diego and LAX then onto HNL. I also remember taking a Northwest DC10 and 707 between Spokane and Seattle. I believe most airlines were guilty of waste at some point, due to positioning, lack of aircraft etc.
 
Kahala777
Posts: 1513
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 7:28 am

RE: DL 394 Change To 757. Why?

Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:16 am

What about Delta Airlines and the 767-400, 777-200, and ex MD-11, L1011 on MCO-ATL?

What about Hawaiian Airlines 767-300 and Ontario to Las Vegas?

KAHALA777
 
AirCop
Posts: 5553
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 2:39 am

RE: DL 394 Change To 757. Why?

Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:23 am

Japan Airlines #25 - LAS to LAX. 236 miles in a 747-400.
 
gocaps16
Posts: 4138
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2000 9:14 am

RE: DL 394 Change To 757. Why?

Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:34 am

Ok, What about Saudi Arabian 747-400 from IAD-JFK and vice versa. I already know they fly to JFK to pick up more passengers and continue to where ever they need to go. Practically same was goes to the JAL LAS-LAX flight.

I was booked on a 767-300 from ATL-SAN on Dec. 13 but Delta changed it to a 757 already according to my flight itinerary. Usually the flight is normally full all year around, but it doesn't bother me since I'm flying in first class.

Kevin
 
AirCop
Posts: 5553
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 2:39 am

RE: DL 394 Change To 757. Why?

Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:37 am

But why does JL fly nonstop to LAS from NRT but not the return LAS to NRT?
 
deltagator
Posts: 6170
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 9:56 am

RE: DL 394 Change To 757. Why?

Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:55 am

Quoting Cgnnrw (Reply 3):
I just hope and pray DL doesn't subsitute the 767-400 on the ATL-SFO route. I've read great things about it and have wanted to try one out for a long time.

If you get First try to get Seats 7E or 7F. They are the pilot rest seats for the HNL flights and have more legroom. If you get coach it is just like every other domestic coach seat out there. Nothing fancy but it gets you where you want to go. Also, PTVs in First but not in Steerage.

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 11):
What about Delta Airlines and the 767-400, 777-200, and ex MD-11, L1011 on MCO-ATL?

They flew it for capacity as the main reason. Lots of people want to go the Mouse House for vacation. The 777 was also kept on that route as a quick spare in case one of the ATL-NRT route birds went Mx. That 777 is now going to LAX for the LAX-ATL-TLV and return route. I suppose they will replace it with a 767-400 or -300.
"If you can't delight in the misery of others then you don't deserve to be a college football fan."
 
nudelhirsch
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2003 6:20 am

RE: DL 394 Change To 757. Why?

Thu Dec 01, 2005 12:13 pm

Quoting AirCop (Reply 14):
But why does JL fly nonstop to LAS from NRT but not the return LAS to NRT?

Winds... Transatlantic you can have easily 2 hours of time difference, it takes longer to fly westbound. Over the Pacific there also is a jetstream that supports eastbound flights but cuts on range on westbound flights... Just imagine: when SRB crossed the Pacific in a balloon, they went eastbound...  Wink

Similar things: when flying westbound the 757 transatlantics sometimes come in for refueling if the wind gets too strong.
How about the LHR-SYD route? Eastbound not a problem, departing LHR, but getting home?
Putana da Seatbeltz!
 
AirCop
Posts: 5553
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 2:39 am

RE: DL 394 Change To 757. Why?

Thu Dec 01, 2005 12:31 pm

Don't think thats the reason, because NW used to go non-stop both ways in a 747-200.
 
nudelhirsch
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2003 6:20 am

RE: DL 394 Change To 757. Why?

Thu Dec 01, 2005 12:49 pm

Maybe with reduced payload and not full load?
Putana da Seatbeltz!
 
cgnnrw
Posts: 1044
Joined: Tue May 17, 2005 3:11 am

RE: DL 394 Change To 757. Why?

Thu Dec 01, 2005 9:55 pm

Quoting DeltaGator (Reply 15):
f you get First try to get Seats 7E or 7F. They are the pilot rest seats for the HNL flights and have more legroom. If you get coach it is just like every other domestic coach seat out there. Nothing fancy but it gets you where you want to go. Also, PTVs in First but not in Steerage.

Thanks for the tip; however, I'm in economy on all flights. I did make sure I get an aisle seat though.

Quoting 1011 (Reply 6):
I'd be pretty pissed off if my 762 was changed to a 757. I pick my flights by the plane type and try to almost always get a widebody. I won't fly transcon on any narrowbody unless I really have to.

I think the reason I'm such a wide-body fan ist I'm one of those passengers that likes to "wander" around during a flight. It probably bugs the heck out of the F/As but I can't seem to sit still for more than an hour at a time....

I've read other posts about DL getting rid of their 767-200s. Unfortunately they decided to do it before my flight. Why didn't they ask me first?????  Wink I did get an aisle seat on this flight so I can stretch my legs during the night. I hope there aren't a lot of sleepwalkers on board.

Quoting OOer (Reply 7):
The 767-400 you fly on from ATL to SFO will not ne switched...as it continues to HNL after SFO...unless they cancel that flight...the 764 isnt going anywhere!!!

Good to hear. Do you happen to know what the inflight service is like. Are meals served or is it pay for food concept on this flight?

Again, thanks for all the posts. I'm flying AF next week to the PHL and then head out to SFO on DL. Keep an eye out for the trip reports in January.

Cheers to you all!
A330 man.
 
panamair
Posts: 3759
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 2:24 am

RE: DL 394 Change To 757. Why?

Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:09 pm

Quoting Cgnnrw (Reply 19):
Do you happen to know what the inflight service is like. Are meals served or is it pay for food concept on this flight?

No, DL has abandoned the Food for Purchase concept on Mainline flights (only on Song can you still buy food). Basically you get a snack box consisting of cheese and crackers, raisins, etc. Later on, the FAs come through with the snack basket, offering you a choice of peanuts, Sun Chips, Animal crackers, Cheese and Wheat crackers, or Chocolate Chip Chewy Granola Bars. All of the above are complimentary. Soft drinks are complimentary as well while alcohol is the usual US$5. First Class will get a hot meal from ATL to SFO.
 
cgnnrw
Posts: 1044
Joined: Tue May 17, 2005 3:11 am

RE: DL 394 Change To 757. Why?

Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:14 pm

Quoting Panamair (Reply 20):
No, DL has abandoned the Food for Purchase concept on Mainline flights (only on Song can you still buy food). Basically you get a snack box consisting of cheese and crackers, raisins, etc. Later on, the FAs come through with the snack basket, offering you a choice of peanuts, Sun Chips, Animal crackers, Cheese and Wheat crackers, or Chocolate Chip Chewy Granola Bars. All of the above are complimentary. Soft drinks are complimentary as well while alcohol is the usual US$5. First Class will get a hot meal from ATL to SFO.

Okey-dokey.....many thanks for the info. I'll make sure I have a good breakfast that morning.
A330 man.
 
malaysia
Posts: 2615
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 1999 3:26 am

RE: DL 394 Change To 757. Why?

Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:57 pm

Quoting GOCAPS16 (Reply 13):
Ok, What about Saudi Arabian 747-400 from IAD-JFK and vice versa. I already know they fly to JFK to pick up more passengers and continue to where ever they need to go. Practically same was goes to the JAL LAS-LAX flight.

Been on the SV one a few times just for IAD-JFK-IAD and sometimes to JED-RUH, yeah its pretty empty usually between IAD-JFK, its now a 777.

about the JL one, they dont get enough traffic to return via LAS back to NRT,
since its heavy inbound and then eventually the Japanese tourists like to go
elsewhere to SFO and LAX to sight see more and take a quick route home,
so thats why the flight does not return to LAS
There Are Those Who Believe That There May Yet Be Other Airlines Who Even Now Fight To Survive Beyond The Heavens
 
HiJazzey
Posts: 667
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2005 3:00 am

RE: DL 394 Change To 757. Why?

Fri Dec 02, 2005 7:11 am

Quoting Malaysia (Reply 22):
Been on the SV one a few times just for IAD-JFK-IAD and sometimes to JED-RUH, yeah its pretty empty usually between IAD-JFK, its now a 777.

Yeah it's pretty empty. In general, the passenger numbers to the US isn't great, so they operate a milkround route to keep it viable: RUH-JED-JFK-IAD . Most of the demand is in the JED-JFK sector. Even the 777 is too much plane for this route. It's perfect for the 787-8 though.