727200 wrote:

I thought I read that UA and SW will be the launch customers; and more articles pointed to UA. Guess DL realized they missed the boat on the 787 and figure they better not be left all alone again.

They HAD Dreamliners on order when they merged with NW...they decided not to take them. Dumb decision, imo.

ADrum23 wrote:

It just seems the 787-8 would have been a perfect replacement for the 767's they [DL] had on those routes.

It isn't exactly a secret that AA isn't happy with the operating economics of their 787-8s. What makes you think that the 787-8 would be "perfect" for DL? Why should DL repeat AA's mistake? Why would DL be any more satisfied with 787-8s than a primary competitor who has already gone down that road?

DL747400 wrote:

It isn't exactly a secret that AA isn't happy with the operating economics of their 787-8s.

Just curious, as I've never heard that before, where did you hear that? And is UA disappointed too?

DL747400 wrote:

ADrum23 wrote:

It just seems the 787-8 would have been a perfect replacement for the 767's they [DL] had on those routes.

It isn't exactly a secret that AA isn't happy with the operating economics of their 787-8s. What makes you think that the 787-8 would be "perfect" for DL? Why should DL repeat AA's mistake? Why would DL be any more satisfied with 787-8s than a primary competitor who has already gone down that road?

I have not heard anything to that effect. Could you provide a source for that?

Not to burst anyones hypothetical bubbles - but what IS the 797? Has Boeing defined it yet? Do we know anything about its performance/financial details? Anything at all?

I wonder how an airline boss can express a wish to be the launch customer of an aircraft that hasnt been launched yet! Shareholders should be hauling his arse over the coals for this.

IF he did! IF he did!

(if aviation journalism in the US is anything like it is in India, then I dont think he quite said that)

The 797, if designed with two aisles, and good economics for the 5000nm range will give it an advantage over the A321LR. Not so sure about the cargo capacity as there was talk of the cross section being spherical. I do believe one of the issues delaying the launching and EIS will be finding an engine for the schedule Boeing has in mind.

deltal1011man wrote:

dochawk2 wrote:

Here is an article from Bloomberg: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... yptr=yahoo

Personally, I would love for this to be the case. We shall see! I guess they actually need to design and build one first. May the 797 take flight and create 30 years more of threads on Airliners.net!!!!

has to be #FakeNews.

The armchair CEOs and airbus fan boys of anet have made it clear Delta loves Airbus and hates Boeing.

So true, you would think, based on many of the comments here, that Delta only takes to the skies in Airbuses while ignoring the fact that they utilize more Boeing’s! This isn’t an A vs B decision. The 797 will be a perfect fit for Delta,s needs.

Why would Boeing give DL that luxury when they've dissed Boeing for many airplanes in the past?

wedgetail737 wrote:

Why would Boeing give DL that luxury when they've dissed Boeing for many airplanes in the past?

Really? They cancelled an order that was assumed form NW. Choosing a 321 or the 330s they got for unbeatable prices isn’t dissing Boeing. It is called being responsible. Just like their huge order of 737s wasn’t dissing Airbus, it was the right plane for the right price to do the job they needed it to do.

BawliBooch wrote:

Not to burst anyones hypothetical bubbles - but what IS the 797? Has Boeing defined it yet? Do we know anything about its performance/financial details? Anything at all?

I wonder how an airline boss can express a wish to be the launch customer of an aircraft that hasnt been launched yet! Shareholders should be hauling his arse over the coals for this.

IF he did! IF he did!

(if aviation journalism in the US is anything like it is in India, then I dont think he quite said that)

Manufacturers involve airline operators early in the design process. DL knows a lot about the 797 that has not been released publicly as they have been in discussions with Boeing about it since early in the program.

wedgetail737 wrote:

Why would Boeing give DL that luxury when they've dissed Boeing for many airplanes in the past?

The rest of DLs recent Airbus aircraft choices have been mostly because of the great deals Airbus has been giving them, and the product and schedule they were delivering... the A330neos were supposedly sold for dirt cheap to DL. I think they were understandably very pissed about the C-Series tariffs which drove them to pick the A321neo (though it is arguably a more capable aircraft). But on the whole, Delta's recent gravitation towards Airbus aircraft is simply a cyclical fluctuation towards Airbus aircraft that meet their needs. DL would be the largest airline to move towards a single manufacturer fleet, and by far the largest fullfare carrier. DL actually said that they felt that the 787-8 was a more capable aircraft, but Boeing's pricing and delivery schedule would not work, especially as a relic of the NW merger. Delta does not "diss" Boeing aircraft, they never have. The only aircraft they have really been on record dissing is the A380. This is a fallacy extracted from a poor understanding of Delta's fleet renewal plans. They have been choosing Airbus aircraft (except for, you know, the 140 737-900ER they ordered) because they have met their needs in the long term fleet planning strategy, not because they had any grudge against Boeing... until recently when Boeing decided to take advantage of the recent... administration.... and fight for a 300% tariff on 75 aircraft that Delta had on order. (Yes, I am aware that they fought for a lower tariff.) But clearly Delta is willing to forgive to get the best deal on the right aircraft that they want. The 797, as it has been outlined by Boeing, would fit perfectly into Delta's fleet. They wouldn't pass up that opportunity at the end of the day, and I don't think Boeing would want to pass up a loyal customer. Delta would go to an all-Airbus fleet if Boeing was pissy about them ordering Airbus aircraft, but Boeing isn't run by idiots (except for maybe the 737 re-re-re-engine team), and Delta isn't either.

Revelation wrote:

william wrote:

Revelation wrote:

See also discussion that started three hours ago in:

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1374685&start=950#p20170719

That post almost cost me a new keyboard when I first read it.

LOL, though it must be a worst case scenario for Airbus fanbois.

DL is supposed to be Airbus's BFF but all of a sudden DL's touting the '797'.

What's next, DL's MAX-10 order?

I see no reason on Earth as to why Delta would want to order the MAX-10...

DeSpringbokke wrote:

As for a replacement for the 21 767-400ERs and 21 PMNW A330-300s, I'd look to the 787-10.

Why would a huge A330 customer like DL order 787s - an aircraft they've gone well out of their way to avoid operating - to replace their older A330s when they still have 25 more on the way?

B757Forever wrote:

Manufacturers involve airline operators early in the design process. DL knows a lot about the 797 that has not been released publicly as they have been in discussions with Boeing about it since early in the program.

OK i got that.

But havent there been numerous cases where the airline that has been part of the aircrafts design phase did not end up ever operating that aircraft?

Qantas comes to mind with the 777.

dochawk2 wrote:

wedgetail737 wrote:

Why would Boeing give DL that luxury when they've dissed Boeing for many airplanes in the past?

Really? They cancelled an order that was assumed form NW. Choosing a 321 or the 330s they got for unbeatable prices isn’t dissing Boeing. It is called being responsible. Just like their huge order of 737s wasn’t dissing Airbus, it was the right plane for the right price to do the job they needed it to do.

There's more to it than that. EXIM bank and C Series seem to have been quickly forgotten.

I'll believe it when the planes are delivered.

DarthLobster wrote:

DeSpringbokke wrote:

As for a replacement for the 21 767-400ERs and 21 PMNW A330-300s, I'd look to the 787-10.

Why would a huge A330 customer like DL order 787s - an aircraft they've gone well out of their way to avoid operating - to replace their older A330s when they still have 25 more on the way?

Uh, look at high capacity TATL/Deep South America flights that the 787-10 perfectly fills. Offers greater flexibility. I do think Delta will order more A330 NEOs but they'll definitely order the 787-10. Delta executives have had nothing but good things to say about the plane. Its just not the right time for Delta to order the aircraft.

BawliBooch wrote:

B757Forever wrote:

Manufacturers involve airline operators early in the design process. DL knows a lot about the 797 that has not been released publicly as they have been in discussions with Boeing about it since early in the program.

OK i got that.

But havent there been numerous cases where the airline that has been part of the aircrafts design phase did not end up ever operating that aircraft?

Qantas comes to mind with the 777.

Well, AFAIK it’s the exception to the rule. Most of the time the airlines involved end up ordering the aircraft.

DarthLobster wrote:

DeSpringbokke wrote:

As for a replacement for the 21 767-400ERs and 21 PMNW A330-300s, I'd look to the 787-10.

Why would a huge A330 customer like DL order 787s - an aircraft they've gone well out of their way to avoid operating - to replace their older A330s when they still have 25 more on the way?

Well out of their way? They cancelled an order that Northwest paid way too much money for that had to be deferred. It wasn't the right schedule or price. Delta is on record saying that they felt the 787 was the more capable aircraft, but Boeing was not willing to give them the right schedule or price. It was a legacy of the northwest merger, an asset they used to get leverage for the 737-900ER order.

jubguy3 wrote:

DarthLobster wrote:

DeSpringbokke wrote:

As for a replacement for the 21 767-400ERs and 21 PMNW A330-300s, I'd look to the 787-10.

Why would a huge A330 customer like DL order 787s - an aircraft they've gone well out of their way to avoid operating - to replace their older A330s when they still have 25 more on the way?

Well out of their way? They cancelled an order that Northwest paid way too much money for that had to be deferred. It wasn't the right schedule or price. Delta is on record saying that they felt the 787 was the more capable aircraft, but Boeing was not willing to give them the right schedule or price. It was a legacy of the northwest merger, an asset they used to get leverage for the 737-900ER order.

I don't think that was used for 737-900ER. DL actually didn't have any intention to take more order but Boeing executed "put" option to force them take the plane.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... rs-436240/
This was discussed before in the past .....

I am still laughing that some here actually that Boeing was blacklisted by Delta. What did we learn here, it’s all about the MONEY. Delta wants to get in on the launch price sale too. Especially if other majors are getting in line.

DeSpringbokke wrote:

DarthLobster wrote:

DeSpringbokke wrote:

As for a replacement for the 21 767-400ERs and 21 PMNW A330-300s, I'd look to the 787-10.

Why would a huge A330 customer like DL order 787s - an aircraft they've gone well out of their way to avoid operating - to replace their older A330s when they still have 25 more on the way?

Uh, look at high capacity TATL/Deep South America flights that the 787-10 perfectly fills. Offers greater flexibility. I do think Delta will order more A330 NEOs but they'll definitely order the 787-10. Delta executives have had nothing but good things to say about the plane. Its just not the right time for Delta to order the aircraft.

DL has been pretty cautious about adding capacity so I really don't see they buy 787-10.
Looking at their routes for A350 and B777 today, all these birds are flying TPAC except AMS and JNB.
I would guess the chances that they'll upgauge from A330/767 size to 787-10 is slim ......

jfk777 wrote:

Arion640 wrote:

jfk777 wrote:

AS a huge user of 767 Delta and the world has been waiting too long for the 797. Boeing has been too worried about the "Emiratization" of the world's airplanes beling able to fly 8,000 miles. No one bothered to ask about the 5,000 mile market. The 787-9 and 777-9 fly up to 9,000 miles and that cost money in extra weight that has to be carried for all that extra fuel, one problem is many airlines use 777 & 787 on 5,000 flights. Seattle forgot about the 767, even though the A330 killed it. The 797 is a plane that should have been built circa 2005.

The Emiratization of airplanes? You just said yourself the MOM should of been built in 2005. Boeing made the cock up by not re engining the 757 and/or 767 earlier. Not sure what Emirates has to do with this?

The "Emiratization " refers to what a Lufthansa executive says about the 777-9, its builts for harsh takeoff conditions in Dubai to fly 9,000 miles. LH operates longest sector is to Buenos Aires which is about 7,000 miles. LH is paying for extra takeoff performance and extra infrastructue (weight) on the 777-9 to handle the Capability Emirates needs. Boeing built the 777-9 to the capability needs by the ME3 since they placed a huge launch order for over 200 777-8/9.

Ahh so one Airliner has been "emiratestized". Not really that relevant when it comes to the MOM considering is unlikley Emirates would ever buy it.

ADrum23 wrote:

It just seems the 787-8 would have been a perfect replacement for the 767's they had on those routes.

ADrum23 wrote:

you'd think there would be a need for some to replace their 767's

As an earnest question: do you realize just how much heavier a 787 is than their 767s?
Why do you assume that model to be such a natural replacement?

Arion640 wrote:

Boeing made the cock up by not re engining the 757 and/or 767 earlier.

Can you remind us which airlines were asking Boeing to re-engine either model?
Or which OEM had was working toward a new modern engine in the thrust class for either?

...we'll wait.

wedgetail737 wrote:

Why would Boeing give DL that luxury when they've dissed Boeing for many airplanes in the past?

Uhhhh, money, perhaps?

jubguy3 wrote:

The only aircraft they have really been on record dissing is the A380.

A brief interruption (to set the record straight), but DL did publicly complain quite a bit about the poor performance of the MD-11 when they first started flying them. Also, to a much lesser extent, they also complained openly about the cold fuel soaked wings on the MD-88 when those first started flying. And they were also very negative on the A310 that that they got from Pan Am, and also the new builds that Airbus suckered them into buying. They also complained about the poor support and life-cycle on the CRJ50. They didn't very much like the DC10 they had to fly while RR was trying to put engines on the L1011. But that is ancient history, and I realize that most of you probably weren't even born when those issues happened, so may not realize that DL bounces from manufacturer to manufacturer all through their history.

DL was always primarly a (McDonald)Douglas customer, until the Conviar showed up. Then the L-1011 showed up. They dipped their toes into the 727. They tried the 747. Didn't like it. But did like the 737, 757, 767. Tried to stay loyal to MD with the MD11. Bad experience. Loved the MD-88 after solving the icing issue (and spending millions on de-icing trucks for Florida). Got burned on the A310, but went back for more A330 later. Absolutely loved the CRJ50, until they realized that at the 15 year mark, no more support. But still went ahead and ordered plenty more BBD products. DL does what DL does what's best for DL and when DL wants to do it. No rhyme or reason. That's all there is to it.

Back to the 797 discussion....

LAX772LR wrote:

ADrum23 wrote:

It just seems the 787-8 would have been a perfect replacement for the 767's they had on those routes.

ADrum23 wrote:

you'd think there would be a need for some to replace their 767's

As an earnest question: do you realize just how much heavier a 787 is than their 767s?
Why do you assume that model to be such a natural replacement?

Arion640 wrote:

Boeing made the cock up by not re engining the 757 and/or 767 earlier.

Can you remind us which airlines were asking Boeing to re-engine either model?
Or which OEM had was working toward a new modern engine in the thrust class for either?

...we'll wait.

wedgetail737 wrote:

Why would Boeing give DL that luxury when they've dissed Boeing for many airplanes in the past?

Uhhhh, money, perhaps?

I don't have an answer to a potential engine manufacturer for a re-engine. But it's obvious there is no perfect replacement considering the ammount of older 757 and 767's still flying. Obviously at the time when Boeing killed the 757 there was no market left, but if It had held out a bit longer I'm sure they could of picked up a number of reasonable orders for a MAX until a reasonable replacement could be produced.

Revelation wrote:

william wrote:

Revelation wrote:

See also discussion that started three hours ago in:

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1374685&start=950#p20170719

That post almost cost me a new keyboard when I first read it.

LOL, though it must be a worst case scenario for Airbus fanbois.

DL is supposed to be Airbus's BFF but all of a sudden DL's touting the '797'.

What's next, DL's MAX-10 order?

Would it be shocking for Airbus fanboys? I don't understand the rationale. Ok, I am not an Airbus fanboy nor a Boeing one, but isn't it more true that the Boeing fanboys were actually feeling seriously butt-hurt that a.nets most loved pinky airline wouldn't order an American product for American consumers flying an American airline?

All in all, Mr. Bastians statements didn't say anything one way or the other. Of course Delta, as professional airline, is taking actively part in the process, making sure their interests are heard. Of course, if the results fits perfectly at the right time, they would be interested in being launch customer.

Not sure where the hype comes from. If the plane is right, Delta will buy it. If it isn't...well, then not.

ADrum23 wrote:

Should probably buy some Dreamliners first, but this is an interesting development if true.

But they don't need them.... So why? To show loyalty?
You don't build up an unneeded additional fleet merely to show trust.
They have a ton of perfectly capable and comparable 330s, plus 350s coming and 330NEOs on order....

ocracoke wrote:

jubguy3 wrote:

The only aircraft they have really been on record dissing is the A380.

A brief interruption (to set the record straight), but DL did publicly complain quite a bit about the poor performance of the MD-11 when they first started flying them. Also, to a much lesser extent, they also complained openly about the cold fuel soaked wings on the MD-88 when those first started flying. And they were also very negative on the A310 that that they got from Pan Am, and also the new builds that Airbus suckered them into buying. They also complained about the poor support and life-cycle on the CRJ50. They didn't very much like the DC10 they had to fly while RR was trying to put engines on the L1011. But that is ancient history, and I realize that most of you probably weren't even born when those issues happened, so may not realize that DL bounces from manufacturer to manufacturer all through their history.

DL was always primarly a (McDonald)Douglas customer, until the Conviar showed up. Then the L-1011 showed up. They dipped their toes into the 727. They tried the 747. Didn't like it. But did like the 737, 757, 767. Tried to stay loyal to MD with the MD11. Bad experience. Loved the MD-88 after solving the icing issue (and spending millions on de-icing trucks for Florida). Got burned on the A310, but went back for more A330 later. Absolutely loved the CRJ50, until they realized that at the 15 year mark, no more support. But still went ahead and ordered plenty more BBD products. DL does what DL does what's best for DL and when DL wants to do it. No rhyme or reason. That's all there is to it.

Back to the 797 discussion....

Thanks for instilling a bit of a sense of reality, plus a grain of salt into this discussion. And a ton of unbiased perspective. I guess 'being of age' as we are has its advantages

We really do need more people like you on this board.

Yours is a great contribution.

Arion640 wrote:

but if It had held out a bit longer I'm sure they could of picked up a number of reasonable orders for a MAX until a reasonable replacement could be produced.

Based on what? A plane nobody is asking Boeing to produce, powered by an engine that manufacturer is forecasting to make?

....that makes even less sense than your original statement.

Plot twist. Alaska becomes launch customer for 797 as they return all of their Airbus aircraft in a move to become "Proudly All Boeing, Again". Use the planes on SEA-ANC to start.

LAX772LR wrote:

Arion640 wrote:

but if It had held out a bit longer I'm sure they could of picked up a number of reasonable orders for a MAX until a reasonable replacement could be produced.

Based on what? A plane nobody is asking Boeing to produce, powered by an engine that manufacturer is forecasting to make?

....that makes even less sense than your original statement.

We don't know for sure what discussions have gone on. I'm sure if it would of been possible to produce most potential MOM customers would of been interested.

And to be honest, i'm not sure if your statement makes much sense "powered by an engine that manufacturer is forecasting to make" ????

LAX772LR wrote:

Arion640 wrote:

but if It had held out a bit longer I'm sure they could of picked up a number of reasonable orders for a MAX until a reasonable replacement could be produced.

Based on what? A plane nobody is asking Boeing to produce, powered by an engine that manufacturer is forecasting to make?

....that makes even less sense than your original statement.

We don't know for sure what discussions have gone on. I'm sure if it would of been possible to produce most potential MOM customers would of been interested.

And to be honest, i'm not sure if your statement makes much sense "powered by an engine that manufacturer is forecasting to make" ????

LAX772LR wrote:

Arion640 wrote:

but if It had held out a bit longer I'm sure they could of picked up a number of reasonable orders for a MAX until a reasonable replacement could be produced.

Based on what? A plane nobody is asking Boeing to produce, powered by an engine that manufacturer is forecasting to make?

....that makes even less sense than your original statement.

We don't know for sure what discussions have gone on. I'm sure if it would of been possible to produce most potential MOM customers would of been interested.

And to be honest, i'm not sure if your statement makes much sense "powered by an engine that manufacturer is forecasting to make" ????

I agree, no surprise about DL’s interest. They’ve said that the 787 is too much plane for their TATL routes. The 330 is too big, at least in the more economical 339 model. I expect that the range and economics of this plane could also grow additional TATL flights to secondary European cities, and possibly from some US based non-traditional hubs - maybe more flights from BOS, RDU, AUS, PIT etc...

Arion640 wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

Arion640 wrote:

but if It had held out a bit longer I'm sure they could of picked up a number of reasonable orders for a MAX until a reasonable replacement could be produced.

Based on what? A plane nobody is asking Boeing to produce, powered by an engine that manufacturer is forecasting to make?

....that makes even less sense than your original statement.

We don't know for sure what discussions have gone on. I'm sure if it would of been possible to produce most potential MOM customers would of been interested.

And to be honest, i'm not sure if your statement makes much sense "powered by an engine that manufacturer is forecasting to make" ????

Pretty obvious he meant to say "powered by an engine that NO manufacturer is forecasting to make". And right he is.

Great comeback, I say this is more about appeasing those who live in Seattle. Delta know it want be able to throw Boeing under the bus and build a Seattle hub. Regardless of how wrong Boeing May have been, those most who love in Seattle will see Boeing through rose colored glasses.

DL has to be a prime candidate for the 797. I don't buy the Airbus BFF line really. History shows they will select the best aircraft for their needs and that this is beyond loyalty to one manufacturer. No reason why DL wouldn't operate the A330 Neo and 797 side by side. This might mean no 787 order from DL. I would think AA and UA will also be keen on the 797 together with a handful of Asian and European carriers. We could see some quite large orders. Will be interesting if this jet is launched to watch what unfolds.

DeSpringbokke wrote:

Raise your hand if you find Delta wanting to be a launch customer for the 797 hard to be believe. (My hand is not raised.) I have no idea why this is so shocking to those on this forum.

I guess you missed all the bleating on the C Series threads about how DL was so pissed at Boeing that they would never do business with them ever again, yada yada.

speedbird52 wrote:

I see no reason on Earth as to why Delta would want to order the MAX-10...

Here on Earth we might see DL following the same reasoning for MAX-10 as they are for 797 -- MAX-10 will be more efficient than A321 on shorter routes, and Boeing probably will sell them cheaper than Airbus will sell A321 (due to its big backlog and perhaps due to AA's "most favored customer" contract), there might be value for their MRO business to have some MAXes in the fleet, etc. You do know that DL is taking 130 737-900ERs right here on earth right as we speak, no?

NZ321 wrote:

No reason why DL wouldn't operate the A330 Neo and 797 side by side.

The ex-Airbus salesman John Leahy told us Airbus has eliminated the 797's market via A321neo and A330neo yet here we have a showcase customer who has both of those on order and is now saying they want to be the launch customer for the '797'. If Leahy were right, there'd be no need for the '797' at DL, yet now DL's CEO emphatically says otherwise. Not a good day for Airbus fanboi.

767-400 2.0

Varsity1 wrote:

Delta knows if they sour the relationship with Boeing much more, it will ruin any negotiation advantage they have with Airbus. Airbus has a captive audience with Delta on anything larger than a C-Series and will price accordingly.

Let me rephrase this for you so it reflects the reality of the subject...

Delta knows that if they sour the relationship with Boeing much more, it won't matter with Airbus, no matter what, when the time comes for a large wide body order, Boeing and Airbus will both submit competitive bids , because both manufacturers know that if they try and get to aggressive with the pricing DL will head over to the other manufacture, that is just the nature of the business.

Antarius wrote:

SW like Southwest?

I highly doubt WN/Southwest is abandoning its successful single type rating model to introduce a 797.

If WN decides to get serious with international flying, I am sure they will start with routes that they can use their 737's on, but at some point they will need a more capable aircraft. What will be more interesting is the reaction of the US should WN ever decide to get into the longhaul game.

ADrum23 wrote:

WN is great if you need a quick trip within the lower 48, but as they expand from being a niche LCC to a major domestic airline, their tiny international service and lack of codeshare options to connect outside of the lower 48 makes them a much less attractive option.

Huh ????? You do know that WN carries by FAR the highest number of domestic passengers in the US right ? Not even close, the lack of codeshare and international flights really has not stopped them in any way, as I note above, what will be interesting is if WN decides to start flying internationally in a serious way. with their domestic network, they could funnel international fliers into 2-3 hubs and dominate those routes.

wedgetail737 wrote:

Why would Boeing give DL that luxury when they've dissed Boeing for many airplanes in the past?

As above, it's pretty simple, money, Boeing is in the business of selling aircraft, if Delta (or any airline) puts out bids for 100 widebody aircraft it wouldn't matter what the past was, Boeing (and Airbus for that matter) want part of that pie.

AWACSooner wrote:

Just curious, as I've never heard that before, where did you hear that?

ADrum23 wrote:

I have not heard anything to that effect. Could you provide a source for that?

Holly Hegeman on PlaneBusiness.com, in the February 6, 2018 edition of PlaneBusiness Banter (subscription newsletter).

airbazar wrote:

767-400 2.0

Boeing's bean counters wish they could get away with that, but...

Nothing too surprising in this at all. Bastian is a smart fellow and knows he needs A, B & Bombardier. DL is a large airline with many different markets thus the need for different types of aircraft. This need for the 797 from DL's perspective has been looming ever since the cancellation of the 757. Given the population of 757's at DL it just makes good sense to cozy up to Boeing again. The A321 is not a true replacement for the 757 and neither is the 788 of which DL cancelled from the NW legacy orders. However, given DL's all in approach on this now one would seem to believe that an official 797 launch is coming this year, perhaps July 16th, 17th or 18th?

All in all it is good to see and can't wait to see the 797 in DL livery and fly on it but I will miss the Porsche of the skies, the glorious 757!

DL may very will be the launch customer but I also think both AA and UA would be right there with their own order for the 797. As a result of the merger with CO, UA became the U.S. launch customer for the 787 program and operated that fleet type for a few years before AA obtained their first frame. I think for the 797 if DL is the launch customer their lead time will probably be days or weeks not years because both AA and UA have 767s that they need to replace. Although UA is investing in a life extension program for their 763s UA has made it no secret that they are interested in the 797.

Also lets not forget Airbus is reportedly also considering their own MoM aircraft should Boeing in fact launch the 797, so lets not read to much into this article because both AA, DL and UA could go with an Airbus MoM over Boeings proposed 797 or they could split the order between an Airbus MoM and the 797 we have no idea what is going to happen all we know is all of these airlines have a ton of 767s that will need to be replaced.

ocracoke wrote:

jubguy3 wrote:

The only aircraft they have really been on record dissing is the A380.

A brief interruption (to set the record straight), but DL did publicly complain quite a bit about the poor performance of the MD-11 when they first started flying them. Also, to a much lesser extent, they also complained openly about the cold fuel soaked wings on the MD-88 when those first started flying. And they were also very negative on the A310 that that they got from Pan Am, and also the new builds that Airbus suckered them into buying. They also complained about the poor support and life-cycle on the CRJ50. They didn't very much like the DC10 they had to fly while RR was trying to put engines on the L1011. But that is ancient history, and I realize that most of you probably weren't even born when those issues happened, so may not realize that DL bounces from manufacturer to manufacturer all through their history.

DL was always primarly a (McDonald)Douglas customer, until the Conviar showed up. Then the L-1011 showed up. They dipped their toes into the 727. They tried the 747. Didn't like it. But did like the 737, 757, 767. Tried to stay loyal to MD with the MD11. Bad experience. Loved the MD-88 after solving the icing issue (and spending millions on de-icing trucks for Florida). Got burned on the A310, but went back for more A330 later. Absolutely loved the CRJ50, until they realized that at the 15 year mark, no more support. But still went ahead and ordered plenty more BBD products. DL does what DL does what's best for DL and when DL wants to do it. No rhyme or reason. That's all there is to it.

Back to the 797 discussion....

Thank you, excellent post and history lesson. Some of us Anetters are seasoned enough to remember the facts you laid out.

jayunited wrote:

DL may very will be the launch customer but I also think both AA and UA would be right there with their own order for the 797. As a result of the merger with CO, UA became the U.S. launch customer for the 787 program and operated that fleet type for a few years before AA obtained their first frame. I think for the 797 if DL is the launch customer their lead time will probably be days or weeks not years because both AA and UA have 767s that they need to replace. Although UA is investing in a life extension program for their 763s UA has made it no secret that they are interested in the 797.

Also lets not forget Airbus is reportedly also considering their own MoM aircraft should Boeing in fact launch the 797, so lets not read to much into this article because both AA, DL and UA could go with an Airbus MoM over Boeings proposed 797 or they could split the order between an Airbus MoM and the 797 we have no idea what is going to happen all we know is all of these airlines have a ton of 767s that will need to be replaced.

Considering that Airbus would like to protect that cash cow A321, your second paragraph is null and void. Again, Airbus has stated publicly stated the MOM market is covered with the A320 and A330. The only way Airbus starts a new MOM project is if the 797 get the same "euphoria" (forgot what aviation official used that word) wave of orders the 787 received.

Nicoeddf wrote:

Arion640 wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

Based on what? A plane nobody is asking Boeing to produce, powered by an engine that manufacturer is forecasting to make?

....that makes even less sense than your original statement.

We don't know for sure what discussions have gone on. I'm sure if it would of been possible to produce most potential MOM customers would of been interested.

And to be honest, i'm not sure if your statement makes much sense "powered by an engine that manufacturer is forecasting to make" ????

Pretty obvious he meant to say "powered by an engine that NO manufacturer is forecasting to make". And right he is.

He helps me out by telling me I don't make any sense, so naturally I'm just returning the favour.

Nicoeddf wrote:

Arion640 wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

Based on what? A plane nobody is asking Boeing to produce, powered by an engine that manufacturer is forecasting to make?

....that makes even less sense than your original statement.

We don't know for sure what discussions have gone on. I'm sure if it would of been possible to produce most potential MOM customers would of been interested.

And to be honest, i'm not sure if your statement makes much sense "powered by an engine that manufacturer is forecasting to make" ????

Pretty obvious he meant to say "powered by an engine that NO manufacturer is forecasting to make". And right he is.

He helps me out by telling me I don't make any sense, so naturally I'm just returning the favour.

william wrote:

jayunited wrote:

DL may very will be the launch customer but I also think both AA and UA would be right there with their own order for the 797. As a result of the merger with CO, UA became the U.S. launch customer for the 787 program and operated that fleet type for a few years before AA obtained their first frame. I think for the 797 if DL is the launch customer their lead time will probably be days or weeks not years because both AA and UA have 767s that they need to replace. Although UA is investing in a life extension program for their 763s UA has made it no secret that they are interested in the 797.

Also lets not forget Airbus is reportedly also considering their own MoM aircraft should Boeing in fact launch the 797, so lets not read to much into this article because both AA, DL and UA could go with an Airbus MoM over Boeings proposed 797 or they could split the order between an Airbus MoM and the 797 we have no idea what is going to happen all we know is all of these airlines have a ton of 767s that will need to be replaced.

Considering that Airbus would like to protect that cash cow A321, your second paragraph is null and void. Again, Airbus has stated publicly stated the MOM market is covered with the A320 and A330. The only way Airbus starts a new MOM project is if the 797 get the same "euphoria" (forgot what aviation official used that word) wave of orders the 787 received.

Airbus is publicly stating that because they already offer the A321 and A330 for sale to customers. Airbus/Boeing will tell you their plane is the greatest and most suitable plane in the world, up to the minute they annouce a new plane for the market then the old one is trash and ill suited for the mission. There doesn’t have to be a 787 like mad dash to get Airbus to change their mind though. If the 797 generates enough interest that Airbus has to start heavily discounting the A321LR in the interim then the long term future of the model may be in doubt.

Airbus may try and preemptively prevent that, and try to cut off the 797 at the knees before it can evolve into a real threat. Just because the 797 is ~7 years away doesn’t mean Airbus has ~7 years to sell A321LRs at a large premium. An airline is not going to to want to pay a lot of a plane that they may feel will be eclipsed (affecting it’s resale value) in a year or two after delivery by another plane. If they feel Airbus’s pricing is too high they will just hold off a year or two until the 797 is available.