I didn't claim that at all.
I claimed that DL's pilots had said, several of them, unless it's just random internet trolls all agreeing with one another, that their jet wasn't doing LAX-SYD with acceptable payload.
So the plane doesn't carry an acceptable payload... on a route that the plane does not fly nor is slated to fly in the foreseeable future, because they have a lower weight variant than they want (now). With this being the case, why is it such a cause for concern?
This answers the question "how is the a350 performing for DL"
Answer to this question is "not as well as they'd like."
So they bought too little jet, we are not privy to how the conversation/negotiation was done. However, that's not relevant. It's not for us to defend a manufacturer or frame when that isn't the issue. The issue was, again, how is the A350 performing for DL
I think it's strange to say that a plane isn't performing as well as an airline would like if the airline's requirements changed after
they made the initial order (and too late for them to change it).
DL was not happy with what they had; they got an uprating. Perhaps those negotiations turned nasty, and this is why they deferred a bunch of orders to 339s...who knows. Would certainly fit the facts and all the time vendors and buyers get into pissing matches between high-ego executives. All the time.
If they turned nasty then ordering an additional 10 A339s and merely deferring the last 10 A359s is a very strange way to hit back at the manufacturer. Seems to me more like they wanted the A339s anyway, and as a concession for the deferral they ordered more aircraft. The deferral also allows them time to consider what capabilities they want, and it could maybe tie in as a 77L replacement down the line.
The real problem is that people on this forum DO NOT WANT TO HEAR ANYTHING NEGATIVE, EVER about this frame or this manufacturer. Even if the blame is on DL for being "too stupid" to get 275t (which is y'all's thesis). So you throw at me what SQ is doing...how is SQ relevant? Or a QR pilot, regardless of whether he ever has any bias, how is a QR pilot relevant to how a different variant is performing for a different airline in a different part of the world on different routes?
Many people are interested in accurate facts and analysis. SQ and QR fly the aircraft with a good payload a long way further than LAX-SYD, which indicates that the aircraft is capable of flying the route with a good payload, but DL for whatever reason doesn't have the weight variant which has the performance requirements. I really fail to see why not being able to do this specific route constitutes 'underperforming'. SYD-LAX, just like ATL-JNB is the preserve of the 77L at present, and there's no reason for DL to be discarding such young aircraft that can do these ultra-long routes with impressive payload. It really is amazing how failure to fly ONE ROUTE is such a cause for criticism. Why not criticise the 737 for not being able to fly the route while we're at it?
The answer remains: the 350 was not performing for DL the way they wanted it to.
"But the thread's topic is how an aircraft performs, not whether the company is satisfied with it or not."
I cannot even fathom a response to something like this...is this earth I am on here?
The A359 may not be performing as DL wants it to now
, but if their requirement changed after they ordered a lower weight variant then I fail to see why it's underperforming, maybe the real underperformers are DL's crystal ball gazers?