premobrimo
Posts: 283
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2004 4:36 am

NW To Restore Capacity

Sat May 27, 2006 8:49 pm

Here is the link:
http://www.startribune.com/535/story/458558.html

Also I see that they mention that the A330 will replace the DC-10 on the MSP-HNL route.
Now You're Flying Smart.
 
CIDFlyer
Posts: 1894
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 7:19 am

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Sat May 27, 2006 10:06 pm

good to see NW will start restoring capacity. Hopefully they will begin to resume connecting more cities to all 3 hubs as they were trying to do before bankruptcy.
 
bkkair
Posts: 384
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2001 9:10 pm

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Sat May 27, 2006 10:21 pm

Interesting point from the article: The new Airbuses will allow Northwest to save up to 30 percent on fuel.

On the MSP-AMS route, the A330-300 can carry 25 more passengers than the DC-10 while consuming 6,100 fewer gallons of fuel each way. At $1.87 a gallon -- Northwest's first-quarter average fuel price -- that would have been a savings of $11,407 per flight.
 
Rottamo
Posts: 135
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 1:45 pm

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Sat May 27, 2006 11:13 pm

Quoting CIDflyer (Reply 1):
On the MSP-AMS route, the A330-300 can carry 25 more passengers than the DC-10 while consuming 6,100 fewer gallons of fuel each way. At $1.87 a gallon -- Northwest's first-quarter average fuel price -- that would have been a savings of $11,407 per flight.

And if plane does two trips per day it will do 730 trips per year.
Yearly savings: $11,407*730=$8,327,110

That's quite a lot money. They have 14 DC-10 right now (I guess) so total fuel cost savings are 14*$8,327,110=$116,579,540.

Rottamo

[Edited 2006-05-27 16:13:59]
 
Sean-SAN-
Posts: 693
Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2002 4:02 pm

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Sat May 27, 2006 11:39 pm

Minus the lease payments on the A330, versus the DC10 ($0) = no additional savings!!
 
chrisa330
Posts: 546
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 1999 10:24 am

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Sat May 27, 2006 11:57 pm

Quoting Sean-SAN- (Reply 4):
Minus the lease payments on the A330, versus the DC10 ($0) = no additional savings!!

Plus the maintenance savings, plus the elimination of the 3rd flight crew, plus the additional revenue potential from the higher capacity.
 
jrlander
Posts: 1025
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 1999 3:47 am

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Sun May 28, 2006 12:02 am

Quoting Sean-SAN- (Reply 4):
Minus the lease payments on the A330, versus the DC10 ($0) = no additional savings!!

Of course the equation isn't nearly as simple as either this or the Star Tribune shows. True, the airline does own its DC-10's- but those older planes also require a lot of maintenance. I would guess that they area also nearing a major maintenance check. Also- NW makes a great deal of money on its World Business Class product. The DC-10's do not have the new seats, while the A-330's will. In Business Class, that might make a difference in their revenue.
 
User avatar
SLCUT2777
Posts: 3407
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 12:17 am

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Sun May 28, 2006 12:28 am

Quoting ChrisA330 (Reply 5):
Quoting Sean-SAN- (Reply 4):
Minus the lease payments on the A330, versus the DC10 ($0) = no additional savings!!
Plus the maintenance savings, plus the elimination of the 3rd flight crew, plus the additional revenue potential from the higher capacity.

VERY well said. There gets to be a point where older airframes bring in diminishing returns despite the lower overhead. For example after a personal vehicle reaches 8-9 years that is also what typically happens. I know that I will have to replace my 2001 Ford Taurus by 2009 or 2010 at the latest or face paying more for repair and fuel inefficiencies. Aircraft for a major air carrier are the same way, and NW has allowed their fleet to become to old, much the way TWA was confronted with back in the 1990s. The NW DC-9s and DC-10s are "hanger queens" and too much is being spent on MX. The A330 is a good replacement choice for the DC-10s and NW followed ACs lead in getting AirBus into the North American wide-body market with a sweet deal.
DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
 
Rottamo
Posts: 135
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 1:45 pm

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Sun May 28, 2006 1:31 am

Quoting Sean-SAN- (Reply 4):
Minus the lease payments on the A330, versus the DC10 ($0) = no additional savings!!

If you own something it does not mean that it is free. Value of DC-10 will decrease every year and there is an opportunity cost of capital.

I don't know what is market value of DC-10, but let’s try to do some calculations.
I assume following:
A330-300 costs 150 million.
Residual value after 25 years is 15 million.
Interest rate is 6%.

So if you borrow 150 million from bank and residual value is 10% after 25 years and you pay yearly payment to bank then it should be about 11,5 million per year.

->Lease payment should be about 11,5 million per year.

11,5 >> 8,3

So right now fuel cost savings are quite a lot smaller than lease costs. Break even is about $2,6 per gallon. And calculations are very sensitive to changes in interest rate.

Rottamo

P.S. Probably my calculation does not make sense but at least nice try  Smile
 
B742
Posts: 3562
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2005 12:48 am

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Sun May 28, 2006 1:50 am

Good news  Smile

It says in the article...
"Northwest also will bring back three Boeing 747-400s for overseas flights. The planes, which seat 403 people, are the largest in Northwest's fleet."

Any idea which a/c will be brought back, and on which routes will they fly?

How is NWA's current financial situation?

Oh, and what a/c are to replace the DC-9's  Big grin  Silly

Rob!  wave 
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Sun May 28, 2006 2:00 am

According to DOT filings here are NWA's DC10 vs A330 hourly operating cost.

DC-10
Crew- $1,300
Fuel- $4,209
Ownership- $598
Insurance- $2
Taxes- $34
Maintenance- $929
Misc- $85
TOTAL- $7,157

A330 (does not specify 200vs300)
Crew- $1,416
Fuel- $2,962
Ownership- $1836
Insurance- $9
Taxes- $0
Maintenance- $91
Misc- $1
TOTAL- $6,233

The significant variance between the two typs are their ownership cost, and maintenance (DC-10 being 10times that of the A330!)
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
worldtraveler
Posts: 3417
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2003 6:18 am

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Sun May 28, 2006 2:50 am

And I believe MSPHNL is over 8 hrs so it will need a relief crew member anyway.
 
Rottamo
Posts: 135
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 1:45 pm

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Sun May 28, 2006 3:20 am

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 10):
P.S. Probably my calculation does not make sense but at least nice try Smile

I have quite bad hangover so my head doesn't work. I guess that I should use real rate of return which mean I assume that price of fuel will increase same pace as inflation. So if I assume that real rate of return is 4% then yearly lease payment should be 9.24 millions and is I do same calculations with 3% then lease payment is 8.20 millions. This is not "real" lease payment, but lease payments adjusted to inflation. Basically I have calculated NPV of buying aircraft and selling it 25 years later vs. paying fixed yearly payment every year next 25 years.

Of course if we feel that fuel price is now unusually high and it will be lower in the future these calculations don't mean anything.


Rottis
 
kcrwflyer
Posts: 2535
Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 11:57 am

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Sun May 28, 2006 3:34 am

Are they only restoring capacity on International routes? or Midwest routes?( a joke) Or will it be to cities they've been cutting back in over the years?
 
wjcandee
Posts: 5189
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Sun May 28, 2006 4:46 am

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 7):
The NW DC-9s and DC-10s are "hanger queens" and too much is being spent on MX.

It just amazes me how people just open mouths and say stuff without any supporting facts. AFAIK, the -9s certainly require more maint than brand-new aircraft because parts time out and heavy checks are necessary. However, to call them "hangar queens", which has a very specific meaning relating to dispatch reliability, is just crap.
 
twolz2rn
Posts: 385
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2005 10:03 am

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Sun May 28, 2006 5:15 am

i also wonder what the 4 747-400's will be used for...maybe permanent switch on the LAX-NRT route? Maybe NW 747's will return to AMS (unlikely but one can only hope!)...
 
USAF757300
Posts: 229
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2004 5:40 am

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Sun May 28, 2006 6:57 am

Quoting TwoLz2Rn (Reply 15):
Maybe NW 747's will return to AMS (unlikely but one can only hope!)...

that is exactly what I was hoping for. It is probably wishful thinking however.
 
burnsie28
Posts: 5042
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 1:49 am

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Sun May 28, 2006 7:53 am

Quoting Sean-SAN- (Reply 4):
Minus the lease payments on the A330, versus the DC10 ($0) = no additional savings!!

Northwest A330's are not leased.

Quoting Rottamo (Reply 8):

A330-300 costs 150 million.

It was reported that NW's A330's were $80 million

Quoting B742 (Reply 9):

Any idea which a/c will be brought back, and on which routes will they fly?

The last 3 of the 744's in NW's fleet, I don't have ship numbers though.

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 7):
The NW DC-9s and DC-10s are "hanger queens" and too much is being spent on MX.

Do your research, the DC-9's dispatch reliability rate is higher then the Airbus A319/A320's

[

Quoting USAF757300 (Reply 16):
that is exactly what I was hoping for. It is probably wishful thinking however.

Don't count on it.


The information about this as well as the pilot recalls I posted about a week ago in a few different topics.
 
iowaman
Posts: 3874
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 2:29 am

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Sun May 28, 2006 9:10 am

Quoting KcrwFlyer (Reply 13):
Or will it be to cities they've been cutting back in over the years?

They will most likely not be adding much if any service back to CRW, as I assume that is what you're getting at.  Wink Wink

Quoting Burnsie28 (Reply 17):
Do your research, the DC-9's dispatch reliability rate is higher then the Airbus A319/A320's

That's surprising, why is that?
 
tbnist03
Posts: 101
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 2:23 am

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Sun May 28, 2006 9:34 am

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 11):
And I believe MSPHNL is over 8 hrs so it will need a relief crew member anyway.

Each way, MSP-HNL is roughly 8 hours.

Quoting Premobrimo (Thread starter):
the A330 will replace the DC-10 on the MSP-HNL route.

As sad as I am to see the DC-10 go, it makes me want to take a trip on the A330, to add another a/c to my flight list.
-Mike
 
AlexPorter
Posts: 1655
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2006 11:10 am

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Sun May 28, 2006 10:20 am

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 7):
The NW DC-9s and DC-10s are "hanger queens" and too much is being spent on MX.

Even if "hanger [sic] queens" is an exaggeration, almost every time I drive past NW's MSP hangar on I-494, the aircraft visible are DC-10s and DC-9s. Last time I went past there early this week, a DC-10 was outside and a DC-9 was in the hangar (with the hangar door open). Usually this is what I see when going past. Sometimes I see an A320 or A319 as well. Even though I see them all the time when I'm flying to/from MSP, I rarely see 757s at the hangar. I don't see 747s or A330s (although the A330 is a given considering that they are DTW based) there much either - but do the 757s, 747s, and A330s use a different hangar?
Last Flight: SCX701 MSP-PHX B738 8Jan2008
 
DTWAGENT
Posts: 753
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 1:16 am

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Sun May 28, 2006 11:41 am

In DTW you will find the A330 in the hanger closest to I-94 highway. I seem them either in the hanger or sitting out side it. As for the 747's they are at a hanger in the middle of the airport property along with the B757's. At least that is where they are sitting when ever I fly out of DTW.
 
worldtraveler
Posts: 3417
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2003 6:18 am

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Sun May 28, 2006 11:49 am

Quoting Tbnist03 (Reply 19):
Each way, MSP-HNL is roughly 8 hours.

Sorry but "roughly" doesn't work for the FAA. The flight is currently blocked at 8.21 on a D10. Unless a 330 can do it under 8 hrs (doubtful), NW will be taking a relief pilot along. And no, he/she isn't needed for the return but it's kinda hard to tell a pilot that since he isn't needed for the return, you won't pay him to come back.
 
XFSUgimpLB41X
Posts: 3961
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2000 1:18 am

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Sun May 28, 2006 12:44 pm

Quoting AlexPorter (Reply 20):
Even if "hanger [sic] queens" is an exaggeration, almost every time I drive past NW's MSP hangar on I-494, the aircraft visible are DC-10s and DC-9s.

That's because that's where the mx hangars for the DC-10's and DC-9's are located... routine checks are accomplished there.


The crew would cost more on the A330's as instead of a CA, FO, and SO.. you have 2 CA's and an FO. Virtually all the leg lengths require 3 pilots... even if the eastbound leg only requires 2, they are going to carry 3 b/c if 3 go over, 3 are coming back.
Chicks dig winglets.
 
kcrwflyer
Posts: 2535
Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 11:57 am

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Sun May 28, 2006 1:11 pm

Quoting Iowaman (Reply 18):
They will most likely not be adding much if any service back to CRW, as I assume that is what you're getting at.

No I wasnt wondering about that. I dont want any more NW, thanks.

I meant exactly what I was asking. Are there any specific areas of their route structure theyll be targeting?
 
atlaaron
Posts: 973
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2006 11:30 pm

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Sun May 28, 2006 1:38 pm

I have a couple of questions:

Are the 747's they are bringing back currently parked in the desert?

How long till NW retires the last of their DC's?

Any value in the DC's or will they rot in the desert?

What will replace them? Do they have a plan yet for that or are they still evaluating aircraft?
 
KingAir200
Posts: 668
Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 1:37 pm

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Sun May 28, 2006 1:47 pm

Quoting ATLAaron (Reply 25):
How long till NW retires the last of their DC's?

Ooh, the forbidden question. Apparently, the 10s are leaving reasonably soon, but they still have to "decide" on something to replace the 9s. Maybe the E190? I heard they would keep the -40s and -50s for a while after the -30s left, I don't know if there is any truth to that anymore.
 
burnsie28
Posts: 5042
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 1:49 am

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Sun May 28, 2006 4:21 pm

Quoting AlexPorter (Reply 20):
NW's MSP hangar on I-494, the aircraft visible are DC-10s and DC-9

Thats because the DC-10's operate almost solely out of MSP, and they usually keep a plane down there after arrival from AMS for the flight to HNL the next day and so on.

Quoting AlexPorter (Reply 20):
(although the A330 is a given considering that they are DTW based) there much either - but do the 757s, 747s, and A330s use a different hangar?

A330's, 747, 757 maint is done at DTW.

Quoting AlexPorter (Reply 20):
Sometimes I see an A320 or A319 as well

I don't know if its being used again, but the Airbus hanger is in Duluth.

Quoting ATLAaron (Reply 25):
How long till NW retires the last of their DC's?

2012 was the last I've heard from NW.

Quoting ATLAaron (Reply 25):
Are the 747's they are bringing back currently parked in the desert?

Yes, Mirana I believe.

Quoting ATLAaron (Reply 25):
What will replace them? Do they have a plan yet for that or are they still evaluating aircraft?

Apparently the E-190/195 for mainline and E-170 for Compass Airlines.
 
757ops
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 9:32 pm

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Sun May 28, 2006 6:49 pm

Why do NW not start a MEM-LGW service? I never undersood why they didnt as so many UK tourist travel to Memphis and teh surrounding area and with hteir conex from MEM I think it would be a winner for them and if they need a new route for a 747 then bring it back to London, the LGW A333 flights are nearly always leaving full in every class!
 
IDAWA
Posts: 281
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2004 9:07 pm

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Sun May 28, 2006 7:41 pm

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 10):
DC-10
Crew- $1,300

A330 (does not specify 200vs300)
Crew- $1,416

How can a DC-10 be cheaper than an A330 in terms of crew, while the first has a three-men cockpit and the second a two-men one? Probably there's something I'm not considering (relief pilots?), may someone explain this?

I-DAWA.
Flown on: 319, 320, 321, 340, 727, 737, 747, 757, 767, 777, DC9, D10, M11, M80, 146, EM2, BEH, CRJ, DH8, L4T.
 
B757capt
Posts: 1301
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 7:11 am

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Sun May 28, 2006 7:59 pm

Quoting IDAWA (Reply 29):

Not only that but just wait until the A330's get older those Airbus MX costs will kill them.
The views written by this user are in no manner the views of my employer and should not be thought as such.
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 6118
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Mon May 29, 2006 12:36 am

Time to clear up some misunderstandings:

DC-10 vs. A330 operating costs:
No one but the number crunchers up in Eagan know the exact economics of each type within NW's fleet, but yes, there is a significant cost savings with the A330 vs. DC-10, hence why NW acted back in 2001 to begin the DC-10 replacement when they ordered the A330's. Fleet renewal does not occur overnight. Yes, the longer A330 flights, require a 3rd relief pilot, but the new proposed contract addressed these wages specifically, rendering this a moot point.

744's coming out of the desert:
NW has rotated in 744's in and out of the desert as they have negotiating lease rates with the leasing companies. When they suspended JFK-NRT, this freed up 2 744's. The 3 744's are coming back to replace the 742 on LAX-NRT, and to replace the DC-10's on NRT-HNL.

Capacity increases:
There is no particular area that is being targeted, it will flights where they make sense to increase capacity. Restoring frequencies in certain markets, backfilling the lost Avro capacity, etc.

Maintenance:
DTW does not do any heavy maintenance, only line & overnight maintanance on all of the fleet types. Often you will see an A330 or 744 sitting outside the hanger since they have some lengthy ground time in DTW specifically to perform light maintenance work, but no dedicated facilities exist in DTW.

DC-9 Hanger Queen:
Despite their age, the DC-9's are not hanger queens, at least any more so than any other fleet type. Their reliability is on par with the other fleet types, and the only aircraft with better reliability is the A319 (since all are 1999 or newer). DC-9's do not have many of the complex systems that the other fleet types have, which in many ways means there is less to go wrong, and less bugs to address. You will often see many -9's sitting around since they are not utilized as many hours per day as they used to be. This is because NW uses the -9's to balance capacity since the -9's can sit around a lot more, yet it really doesn't cost as much since they are paid for. As said, the -9 replacement is coming very soon, TBA by year end. As with everything, it takes time and money to address all of the pressing issues.
 
atlaaron
Posts: 973
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2006 11:30 pm

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Mon May 29, 2006 1:11 am

Quoting IDAWA (Reply 29):
How can a DC-10 be cheaper than an A330 in terms of crew, while the first has a three-men cockpit and the second a two-men one? Probably there's something I'm not considering (relief pilots?), may someone explain this?

My thought is just negotiated pay scales, but I am really not sure. I would think a pilot trained to fly a 330 would be worth more than a pilot trained to fly a DC-10 simply because there are not many commercial airlines still flying the 10 (and certainly there won't be any new ones).

Just a thought.
 
doug_or
Posts: 3125
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2000 9:55 am

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Mon May 29, 2006 1:30 am

Captain's pay rates are about $1 higher on the 330 than the -10. F/O rates almost identical. Further, the F/E payrates for the -10 are only about 15% lower than the F/O rates. My only guesses might be that the 330 goes more senior and gets pilots higher on the payscale (doublful, as I assume most widebody caps are already maxed out, and f/o pay incesases very slowly after y3) , or that the dc-10 crews are more productive. If the 330 is used exclusively internationaly and the -10 is still used for some shorter flights (west coast-Hawaii, domestic) then the 330 would be more likely to need relief crewmembers, pay the higher international per diem, and have longer layovers. Also, does the 330 carry an extra F/A?
When in doubt, one B pump off
 
ArtieFufkin
Posts: 671
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 2:26 pm

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Mon May 29, 2006 1:44 am

Northwest in the long run needs to merge with another major. They are really slowly losing their ability to support a large Asia operation. Tokyo is losing it's role as a connecting point to Asia (Down 36% in travel from US) as more and more direct Asia flights come on line. MSP and DTW have little in competition, but it's the West Coast, CHI, and NYC that have the demand. And that demand is starting to go to Asia non-stop.
 
KingAir200
Posts: 668
Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 1:37 pm

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Mon May 29, 2006 2:07 am

Quoting ArtieFufkin (Reply 34):
Northwest in the long run needs to merge with another major.

Don't you think they would just get "TWA'd" by somebody? That might be good for Dougie & Co, but who else?

[Edited 2006-05-28 19:08:21]
 
burnsie28
Posts: 5042
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 1:49 am

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Mon May 29, 2006 3:16 am

Quoting ArtieFufkin (Reply 34):
Northwest in the long run needs to merge with another major.

No they dont. They can fly those routes themselves within a couple of years.

Quoting ArtieFufkin (Reply 34):
And that demand is starting to go to Asia non-stop.

Yes, and No, NRT also allows for connections to cities that couldnt support a non-stop from the US. Busan is an example. NW flights to NRT are always full. Look for more non-stops to Asia when then 787 comes on-line.
 
Mikey711MN
Posts: 1232
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 4:19 am

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Mon May 29, 2006 3:56 am

Quoting Burnsie28 (Reply 36):
Look for more non-stops to Asia when then 787 comes on-line.

So I wonder if we'll be asking a similar question when that happens...

That is, if these scenarios hold true, NW appears to be in some position to serve medium-sized US cities with direct AMS service, e.g. the "reported" BDL-AMS and the speculated IND-AMS, MKE-AMS, et. al.

Likewise, they are in a similar position to offer direct NRT service, and have to certain extents already done so with their PDX-NRT route. With the very efficient 787, are routings such as MEM-NRT, DEN-NRT (with UA likely following suit with 2x daily 777's and an MSP-LHR routing for good measure), SLC-NRT, etc. on the horizon?

No need to flame...just throwing it out there as an attempt to feed AMS with 757's potentially showing the beginnings of a greater NW international service strategy here.

-Mike

Edit: I got the two NW-related topics crossed up. My bad.

[Edited 2006-05-28 21:14:18]
I plan on living forever. So far, so good...
 
cslusarc
Posts: 553
Joined: Wed May 04, 2005 2:29 pm

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Mon May 29, 2006 9:04 am

Quoting ArtieFufkin (Reply 34):
Northwest in the long run needs to merge with another major. They are really slowly losing their ability to support a large Asia operation. Tokyo is losing it's role as a connecting point to Asia (Down 36% in travel from US) as more and more direct Asia flights come on line. MSP and DTW have little in competition, but it's the West Coast, CHI, and NYC that have the demand. And that demand is starting to go to Asia non-stop.

With which carrier do you think NW should merge with...
1. DL
2. CO
3. US
4. AA
5. UA
6. FedEx
7. UPS
--cslusarc from YWG
 
Rottamo
Posts: 135
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 1:45 pm

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Mon May 29, 2006 9:27 am

Quoting Burnsie28 (Reply 17):
It was reported that NW's A330's were $80 million

OK. Thanks. I just took price of 767 from Boeings web site and assumed that price of A330 is approximately same.  Smile

Then lease payments would be:
3%: 4.4 million per year
4%: 4.9 million per year
6%: 6.1 million per year

It doesn’t matter if planes are owned, these “lease” payments are cost of having a plane changed to yearly costs so we can compare these with yearly fuel savings.

And the result is that NWA will save a lot of money when they start to use A330-300.
At least 14*(8.3-6.1) =30.8 millions per year.

And my personal favourite: Using less fuel is environmental friendly.
 
MastaHanky
Posts: 224
Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 7:02 am

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Mon May 29, 2006 10:02 am

FWIW, it looks like DTW-SLC is back in August. This was dropped in December of last year (along with SNA...which doesn't appear to be back).
 
worldtraveler
Posts: 3417
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2003 6:18 am

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Mon May 29, 2006 10:41 am

Quoting 757ops (Reply 28):
Why do NW not start a MEM-LGW service?

Because the US-UK is highly restrictive and I don't believe MEM London service is permitted. It might be allowed once the EU and US sign and Open Skies agreement (it will happen eventually) but NW has wrapped its European identity completely around KLM and has the fewest non-alliance transatlantic routes of any US airline. It will be an uphill battle for NW to diversify its transatlantic network.

Quoting Burnsie28 (Reply 36):
No they dont. They can fly those routes themselves within a couple of years.

And in the meantime, many other airlines are adding nonstops to other top Asian destinations and siphoning off some of the top markets. NW has a better chance of turning their transpac system around but they really needed some long range medium sized airplanes several years ago. ... and the A330 cannot do much more than off the west coast where NW is relatively weak. If the A330 could do more, you would have to think NW would have begun using them at least from MSP to Asia but they aren't.
 
iowaman
Posts: 3874
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 2:29 am

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Mon May 29, 2006 12:43 pm

Quoting MastaHanky (Reply 40):
(along with SNA...which doesn't appear to be back).

I believe they flew to ONT, not SNA.
 
burnsie28
Posts: 5042
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 1:49 am

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Mon May 29, 2006 2:10 pm

Quoting MastaHanky (Reply 40):
FWIW, it looks like DTW-SLC is back in August. This was dropped in December of last year (along with SNA...which doesn't appear to be back).

It wasn't SNA, it was ONT as Iowaman stated, SLC-DTW was originally planned seasonal.
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 6118
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Tue May 30, 2006 12:03 pm

DTW-SLC went daily, and even double-daily when Delta joined Skyteam. Then DL started the route double daily with E-170's and NW dropped their service. NW will now go summer seasonal alongside DL with a daily A319.
 
supa7E7
Posts: 1360
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2004 2:05 am

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Tue May 30, 2006 12:42 pm

Agreed, NW's strategic position is unknown. The NRT + AMS overseas superhubs were ideal for a bygone era.
"Who's to say spaceships aren't fine art?" - Phil Lesh
 
bobnwa
Posts: 4472
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2000 12:10 am

RE: NW To Restore Capacity

Tue May 30, 2006 9:52 pm

Quoting Supa7E7 (Reply 45):
Agreed, NW's strategic position is unknown. The NRT + AMS overseas superhubs were ideal for a bygone era.

Would you care to expand on that? Do you have info that NWA and AF/KL are not privy to?