Select the '8-K, Current Report Filing' from the available choices. https://ir.delta.com/financials/default.aspx#sec

This is the first time I recall DL talking about fleet simplification as a goal: Reduce complexity with fewer aircraft types. From 13 (2020 estimate) to 8 fleet families by some unspecified future date.

Year-over-year revenue growth:

9% core hubs
10% coastal hubs
14% focus cities
domestic systemwide 8% vs. 4% for industry

Dumping an early $500 million into the pension plan this month/qtr. (The Feds don't mandate any contributions this year but the plan is still under-funded.)

Projecting after-tax ROIC of 15% this year vs. 11% in 2010. (IIRC, Southwest routinely beats that.)

Core Cap-Ex spending of $4.5 Billion in 2020 comparable to 2019. Expecting ~80 new aircraft deliveries.

That is some incredible performance. I am happy to see such a fantastic airline succeed.

The future growth of DL is excellent in that they have the best hubs for growth from LATAM/Aeromexico (2 largest economies in Latin America), Air France/KLM into Europe and Korean Air/China Eastern in East Asia. I didn’t realize this but Korean said and China Eastern combined serve literally every city in East and South Asia. They serve as far west as Dhaka Bangladesh and as Far East as Bali Indonesia and everything in between which includes cities the ANA/United and AA/JAL joint venture don’t serve.

MIflyer12 wrote:

Select the '8-K, Current Report Filing' from the available choices. https://ir.delta.com/financials/default.aspx#sec

This is the first time I recall DL talking about fleet simplification as a goal: Reduce complexity with fewer aircraft types. From 13 (2020 estimate) to 8 fleet families by some unspecified future date.

Year-over-year revenue growth:

9% core hubs
10% coastal hubs
14% focus cities
domestic systemwide 8% vs. 4% for industry

Dumping an early $500 million into the pension plan this month/qtr. (The Feds don't mandate any contributions this year but the plan is still under-funded.)

Projecting after-tax ROIC of 15% this year vs. 11% in 2010. (IIRC, Southwest routinely beats that.)

Core Cap-Ex spending of $4.5 Billion in 2020 comparable to 2019. Expecting ~80 new aircraft deliveries.

Going from 13 to 8 fleet types is Wise:
Current types:
A220
A320 CEO
*A330 CEO
A330 NEO
A350
717
737NG
*757
*767
*777-200ER (RR Engines)
777-200LR (GE engines)
*MD-88
*MD-90

I put a star next to the frames I think will leave, add A321NEO. No huge surprises.

Lightsaber

Presentation can be downloaded directly instead of abbreviated 8K version:

https://s2.q4cdn.com/181345880/files/do ... tation.pdf

lightsaber wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

Select the '8-K, Current Report Filing' from the available choices. https://ir.delta.com/financials/default.aspx#sec

This is the first time I recall DL talking about fleet simplification as a goal: Reduce complexity with fewer aircraft types. From 13 (2020 estimate) to 8 fleet families by some unspecified future date.

Year-over-year revenue growth:

9% core hubs
10% coastal hubs
14% focus cities
domestic systemwide 8% vs. 4% for industry

Dumping an early $500 million into the pension plan this month/qtr. (The Feds don't mandate any contributions this year but the plan is still under-funded.)

Projecting after-tax ROIC of 15% this year vs. 11% in 2010. (IIRC, Southwest routinely beats that.)

Core Cap-Ex spending of $4.5 Billion in 2020 comparable to 2019. Expecting ~80 new aircraft deliveries.

Going from 13 to 8 fleet types is Wise:
Current types:
A220
A320 CEO
*A330 CEO
A330 NEO
A350
717
737NG
*757
*767
*777-200ER (RR Engines)
777-200LR (GE engines)
*MD-88
*MD-90

I put a star next to the frames I think will leave, add A321NEO. No huge surprises.

Lightsaber

What will replace the 77E and the A330ceo fleet?

I think some of that regarding fleet simplification as discussed on the investor day presentation was a bit of a softball response.
After all, they are highlight strategy and vision that they've already started to execute.

The decisions were already in motion to sunset the MD-88 and MD-90 fleet types.
The 757 and 767s are entering the twilight of their career
717s are gone in a decade (or less)
A330 CEOs, actually they have another decade, they will just turn into what the 767 fleet is today. Far too big a captial investment at this time to consider replacement, considering they have a lot to do in terms of addressing the 757 and 767 fleets.
A319 / A320 will just retire out organically as they age-out.

A lot of these simplifications were going to happen anyways over the next decade as many of the legacy fleet types reach their retirements.

lightsaber wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

Select the '8-K, Current Report Filing' from the available choices. https://ir.delta.com/financials/default.aspx#sec

This is the first time I recall DL talking about fleet simplification as a goal: Reduce complexity with fewer aircraft types. From 13 (2020 estimate) to 8 fleet families by some unspecified future date.

Year-over-year revenue growth:

9% core hubs
10% coastal hubs
14% focus cities
domestic systemwide 8% vs. 4% for industry

Dumping an early $500 million into the pension plan this month/qtr. (The Feds don't mandate any contributions this year but the plan is still under-funded.)

Projecting after-tax ROIC of 15% this year vs. 11% in 2010. (IIRC, Southwest routinely beats that.)

Core Cap-Ex spending of $4.5 Billion in 2020 comparable to 2019. Expecting ~80 new aircraft deliveries.

Going from 13 to 8 fleet types is Wise:
Current types:
A220
A320 CEO
*A330 CEO
A330 NEO
A350
717
737NG
*757
*767
*777-200ER (RR Engines)
777-200LR (GE engines)
*MD-88
*MD-90

I put a star next to the frames I think will leave, add A321NEO. No huge surprises.

Lightsaber

I wonder how long a timeframe they're thinking when discussing going from 13 to 8. This list mostly makes sense in the long run (~20 years, once the HGW A333s are gone), but it does leave a 767-sized hole in the widebody fleet.

BNAMealer wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

Select the '8-K, Current Report Filing' from the available choices. https://ir.delta.com/financials/default.aspx#sec

This is the first time I recall DL talking about fleet simplification as a goal: Reduce complexity with fewer aircraft types. From 13 (2020 estimate) to 8 fleet families by some unspecified future date.

Year-over-year revenue growth:

9% core hubs
10% coastal hubs
14% focus cities
domestic systemwide 8% vs. 4% for industry

Dumping an early $500 million into the pension plan this month/qtr. (The Feds don't mandate any contributions this year but the plan is still under-funded.)

Projecting after-tax ROIC of 15% this year vs. 11% in 2010. (IIRC, Southwest routinely beats that.)

Core Cap-Ex spending of $4.5 Billion in 2020 comparable to 2019. Expecting ~80 new aircraft deliveries.

Going from 13 to 8 fleet types is Wise:
Current types:
A220
A320 CEO
*A330 CEO
A330 NEO
A350
717
737NG
*757
*767
*777-200ER (RR Engines)
777-200LR (GE engines)
*MD-88
*MD-90

I put a star next to the frames I think will leave, add A321NEO. No huge surprises.

Lightsaber

What will replace the 77E and the A330ceo fleet?

A359 and A339 presumably. They might be interested in the 787 as well, but that would go against the whole simplification idea.

Lightsaber’s list only shows 7 fleets, so there’s room for one more. NMA? 787?

Prost wrote:

Lightsaber’s list only shows 7 fleets, so there’s room for one more. NMA? 787?

I assumed DL treats separate engines as separate fleets.
So the NEO should be #8.

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

I think some of that regarding fleet simplification as discussed on the investor day presentation was a bit of a softball response.
After all, they are highlight strategy and vision that they've already started to execute.

The decisions were already in motion to sunset the MD-88 and MD-90 fleet types.
The 757 and 767s are entering the twilight of their career
717s are gone in a decade (or less)
A330 CEOs, actually they have another decade, they will just turn into what the 767 fleet is today. Far too big a captial investment at this time to consider replacement, considering they have a lot to do in terms of addressing the 757 and 767 fleets.
A319 / A320 will just retire out organically as they age-out.

A lot of these simplifications were going to happen anyways over the next decade as many of the legacy fleet types reach their retirements.

Agreed. The A330 CEOs should still have plenty of life in them, especially given the commonality with the A330 NEOs that are joining the fleet. I actually wonder about the longevity of the 77L past the middle of the next decade.

The 77Es have probably seen their replacements already ordered in the form of the 10 deferred A350s. That leaves a 777 fleet of just 8 aircraft, with the capabilities of the 77L only really utilized fully on ATL-JNB and LAX-SYD. Perhaps the 77L might see an early exit in favor of more A350s (LATAM delivery slots?) since running a small fleet for those routes will be inefficient from a maintenance, pilot training, and pilot scheduling standpoint.

Pudelhund wrote:

BNAMealer wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Going from 13 to 8 fleet types is Wise:
Current types:
A220
A320 CEO
*A330 CEO
A330 NEO
A350
717
737NG
*757
*767
*777-200ER (RR Engines)
777-200LR (GE engines)
*MD-88
*MD-90

I put a star next to the frames I think will leave, add A321NEO. No huge surprises.

Lightsaber

What will replace the 77E and the A330ceo fleet?

A359 and A339 presumably. They might be interested in the 787 as well, but that would go against the whole simplification idea.

DL isn’t getting the 787 at this point, they’ve made it clear with their actions all of their eggs are in the A330/350 basket for now.

I expect an order for the A321XLR to replace the 757s soon.

janders wrote:

Presentation can be downloaded directly instead of abbreviated 8K version:

https://s2.q4cdn.com/181345880/files/do ... tation.pdf

The 8K isn't abbreviated - in fact it has 25+ extra pages.

Sightseer wrote:

I wonder how long a timeframe they're thinking when discussing going from 13 to 8. This list mostly makes sense in the long run (~20 years, once the HGW A333s are gone), but it does leave a 767-sized hole in the widebody fleet.

The remark on the chart - see page 23 - is 'Future State.' That page also shows avg gauge rising from 127 in 2020 to 150+. I'd say it's mainline + Delta Connection because they show an avg gauge of just 97 for 2009.

I'll double-down on the challenge to lightsaber (and others): Model to fleet to show eight type families and avg gauge of 150 seats. (Of course there's no unique solution.)

MIflyer12 wrote:

The 8K isn't abbreviated - in fact it has 25+ extra pages.

The presentation is full glory in the Mod supplied link, unlike 8K where its indeed abbreviated in size.

MIflyer12 wrote:

Select the '8-K, Current Report Filing' from the available choices. https://ir.delta.com/financials/default.aspx#sec

This is the first time I recall DL talking about fleet simplification as a goal: Reduce complexity with fewer aircraft types. From 13 (2020 estimate) to 8 fleet families by some unspecified future date.

Year-over-year revenue growth:

9% core hubs
10% coastal hubs
14% focus cities
domestic systemwide 8% vs. 4% for industry

Dumping an early $500 million into the pension plan this month/qtr. (The Feds don't mandate any contributions this year but the plan is still under-funded.)

Projecting after-tax ROIC of 15% this year vs. 11% in 2010. (IIRC, Southwest routinely beats that.)

Core Cap-Ex spending of $4.5 Billion in 2020 comparable to 2019. Expecting ~80 new aircraft deliveries.

I can't find anything on the hubs / focus cities. Can you tell me where in which document the yoy revenue growth vis hubs and focus cities is?

jagraham wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

Select the '8-K, Current Report Filing' from the available choices. https://ir.delta.com/financials/default.aspx#sec

This is the first time I recall DL talking about fleet simplification as a goal: Reduce complexity with fewer aircraft types. From 13 (2020 estimate) to 8 fleet families by some unspecified future date.

Year-over-year revenue growth:

9% core hubs
10% coastal hubs
14% focus cities
domestic systemwide 8% vs. 4% for industry

Dumping an early $500 million into the pension plan this month/qtr. (The Feds don't mandate any contributions this year but the plan is still under-funded.)

Projecting after-tax ROIC of 15% this year vs. 11% in 2010. (IIRC, Southwest routinely beats that.)

Core Cap-Ex spending of $4.5 Billion in 2020 comparable to 2019. Expecting ~80 new aircraft deliveries.

I can't find anything on the hubs / focus cities. Can you tell me where in which document the yoy revenue growth vis hubs and focus cities is?

It's on pg. 54.

ScottB wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Going from 13 to 8 fleet types is Wise:
Current types:
A220
A320 CEO
*A330 CEO
A330 NEO
A350
717
737NG
*757
*767
*777-200ER (RR Engines)
777-200LR (GE engines)
*MD-88
*MD-90

I put a star next to the frames I think will leave, add A321NEO. No huge surprises.

Lightsaber

The OP mentions 13 fleet families in 2020 so I suspect they are counting the 77Es and 77Ls as a single fleet family; the A321neos start to arrive in 2020.

I think you're right about the MD-88, MD-90, 757, and 767 fleets departing, but I think the fifth fleet to go is the 717. They have an obvious replacement with the A221/A223 and the vast majority of the 717 fleet is leased. And as we have seen with the MD-88 and MD-90 fleets, the small size of the global 717 fleet will make spare parts more costly as these aircraft enter their third decade. That said, DL would have some leverage with Boeing and lessors to keep the 717s flying; while they are leasing most of their 717 fleet from WN, those subleases would likely have expirations connected to WN's leases, and IIRC Boeing Capital is the lessor for many of those 717s. Obviously it depends on the amount of lease cash flow measured against the cost of maintaining vendor support.

But in the timeframe that 757s, 767s, and 717s would exit the fleet, I think there's an obvious need for something else to fill the gap between the A321neo and the A332. I wouldn't be surprised to see whatever Boeing proposes next (NMA? 737MAX/757 replacement?) in there. That'd probably come in as the 777s exit.

Yeah I don't think the pilots will allow 767's to be replaced by the A321. They are pretty firm when it comes to widebody replacement.

I see it on page 55, actually, and it's a reference to Corporate revenue growth, a distinction I failed to make in the OP - but can't now edit.

TTailedTiger wrote:

ScottB wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Going from 13 to 8 fleet types is Wise:
Current types:
A220
A320 CEO
*A330 CEO
A330 NEO
A350
717
737NG
*757
*767
*777-200ER (RR Engines)
777-200LR (GE engines)
*MD-88
*MD-90

I don't think they distinguish between ceo/neo for fleet families because most systems and components are the same. Also not clear is whether they are also counting regional planes. Assuming no distinction between ceo/neo and including regional I came up with:

Current fleet families (13):
717
737NG (700/800/900ER)
757
767 (300ER/400)
777 (ER/LR)
A220 (200/300)
A320 (319/320/321)
A330 (200/300/900)
A350
MD88
MD90
E170/175
CRJ200/700/900

jagraham wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

Select the '8-K, Current Report Filing' from the available choices. https://ir.delta.com/financials/default.aspx#sec

This is the first time I recall DL talking about fleet simplification as a goal: Reduce complexity with fewer aircraft types. From 13 (2020 estimate) to 8 fleet families by some unspecified future date.

Year-over-year revenue growth:

9% core hubs
10% coastal hubs
14% focus cities
domestic systemwide 8% vs. 4% for industry

Dumping an early $500 million into the pension plan this month/qtr. (The Feds don't mandate any contributions this year but the plan is still under-funded.)

Projecting after-tax ROIC of 15% this year vs. 11% in 2010. (IIRC, Southwest routinely beats that.)

Core Cap-Ex spending of $4.5 Billion in 2020 comparable to 2019. Expecting ~80 new aircraft deliveries.

I can't find anything on the hubs / focus cities. Can you tell me where in which document the yoy revenue growth vis hubs and focus cities is?

On the subject of focus cities, I asked this question in another thread but answers may have been moderated out - has there been any actual growth at any of the focus cities since the announcement? If the largest percentage of revenue growth is expected to be in this area, I’d presume we’d see more flights, new routes or at least additional frequencies and/or upguaging.

There were Q&A sessions scheduled for today but I haven't found any info on them. Perhaps the information was addressed during one of those sessions.

AirFiero wrote:

jagraham wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

Select the '8-K, Current Report Filing' from the available choices. https://ir.delta.com/financials/default.aspx#sec

This is the first time I recall DL talking about fleet simplification as a goal: Reduce complexity with fewer aircraft types. From 13 (2020 estimate) to 8 fleet families by some unspecified future date.

Year-over-year revenue growth:

9% core hubs
10% coastal hubs
14% focus cities
domestic systemwide 8% vs. 4% for industry

Dumping an early $500 million into the pension plan this month/qtr. (The Feds don't mandate any contributions this year but the plan is still under-funded.)

Projecting after-tax ROIC of 15% this year vs. 11% in 2010. (IIRC, Southwest routinely beats that.)

Core Cap-Ex spending of $4.5 Billion in 2020 comparable to 2019. Expecting ~80 new aircraft deliveries.

I can't find anything on the hubs / focus cities. Can you tell me where in which document the yoy revenue growth vis hubs and focus cities is?

On the subject of focus cities, I asked this question in another thread but answers may have been moderated out - has there been any actual growth at any of the focus cities since the announcement? If the largest percentage of revenue growth is expected to be in this area, I’d presume we’d see more flights, new routes or at least additional frequencies and/or upguaging.

Other than some upgauging and some hub frequency increases, I don’t think so, unless you count KL adding AUS as growth.

Not really understanding the strategy here.

Is there something particularly wrong with the 757 and 767 fleet? No mention in this thread about retiring similar aged A320's or 77E's.

BNAMealer wrote:

AirFiero wrote:

jagraham wrote:

I can't find anything on the hubs / focus cities. Can you tell me where in which document the yoy revenue growth vis hubs and focus cities is?

On the subject of focus cities, I asked this question in another thread but answers may have been moderated out - has there been any actual growth at any of the focus cities since the announcement? If the largest percentage of revenue growth is expected to be in this area, I’d presume we’d see more flights, new routes or at least additional frequencies and/or upguaging.

Other than some upgauging and some hub frequency increases, I don’t think so, unless you count KL adding AUS as growth.

Not really understanding the strategy here.

I think the strategy was hope that aa and ua don’t respond. The strongest of the big 3 in AUS already did respond. Delta is the weakest of the Big 3 in California, remains to be seen how SJC will work out.
Delta is strong in the NE (BOS focus city) and very strong in the SE (RDU focus city).
Going into AUS or SJC was always going to be tough given the complete lack of a strong presence anywhere nearby.
Now that AA responded in AUS, it’ll be interesting to see how Delta responds. Feels like a losing battle for Delta but they have plenty of cash to burn if they want.

TTailedTiger wrote:

Yeah I don't think the pilots will allow 767's to be replaced by the A321. They are pretty firm when it comes to widebody replacement.

Not sure what you mean by this.

Firm on what?

The pilots fly the planes that are ordered by the company.

The contract spells out pay rates and which fleets are separated into different pay categories and which ones are lumped together.

Now that three decades of engine technology can provide the same lift for more than 20% less fuel burn, the 757/767 is showing it's age at all carriers around the world,

The 321NEO even beats the 321CEO by something around 20%, so just imagine what it is compared to the 757-200. It's been an awesome airplane for a long time but the writing is on the wall.

It'll be logical for the average segment length of the 757 fleet to gradually decrease over the next few years as the 321 fleet continues to grow.

Like someone mentioned above, I would not be surprised if the 321XLR is ordered to some extent as the 797 is obviously not even a 'paper airplane' yet.

goboeing wrote:

TTailedTiger wrote:

Yeah I don't think the pilots will allow 767's to be replaced by the A321. They are pretty firm when it comes to widebody replacement.

Not sure what you mean by this.

Firm on what?

The pilots fly the planes that are ordered by the company.

The contract spells out pay rates and which fleets are separated into different pay categories and which ones are lumped together.

Now that three decades of engine technology can provide the same lift for more than 20% less fuel burn, the 757/767 is showing it's age at all carriers around the world,

The 321NEO even beats the 321CEO by something around 20%, so just imagine what it is compared to the 757-200. It's been an awesome airplane for a long time but the writing is on the wall.

It'll be logical for the average segment length of the 757 fleet to gradually decrease over the next few years as the 321 fleet continues to grow.

Like someone mentioned above, I would not be surprised if the 321XLR is ordered to some extent as the 797 is obviously not even a 'paper airplane' yet.

What are you not understanding? The pilots are not going to let planes with a higher pay rate go away and be replaced by something with a lesser pay rate. And Delta isn't going to pay widebody wages for a narrowbody plane that can't accommodate nearly as many passengers. Widebodies create upward mobility on the seniority list. It's one of the reasons United's pilots have held firm on not allowing more international flying to be done by partners. They know it will mean fewer widebody positions.

TTailedTiger wrote:

goboeing wrote:

TTailedTiger wrote:

Yeah I don't think the pilots will allow 767's to be replaced by the A321. They are pretty firm when it comes to widebody replacement.

Not sure what you mean by this.

Firm on what?

The pilots fly the planes that are ordered by the company.

The contract spells out pay rates and which fleets are separated into different pay categories and which ones are lumped together.

Now that three decades of engine technology can provide the same lift for more than 20% less fuel burn, the 757/767 is showing it's age at all carriers around the world,

The 321NEO even beats the 321CEO by something around 20%, so just imagine what it is compared to the 757-200. It's been an awesome airplane for a long time but the writing is on the wall.

It'll be logical for the average segment length of the 757 fleet to gradually decrease over the next few years as the 321 fleet continues to grow.

Like someone mentioned above, I would not be surprised if the 321XLR is ordered to some extent as the 797 is obviously not even a 'paper airplane' yet.

What are you not understanding? The pilots are not going to let planes with a higher pay rate go away and be replaced by something with a lesser pay rate. And Delta isn't going to pay widebody wages for a narrowbody plane that can't accommodate nearly as many passengers. Widebodies create upward mobility on the seniority list. It's one of the reasons United's pilots have held firm on not allowing more international flying to be done by partners. They know it will mean fewer widebody positions.

DL's pilots have zero control over what aircraft the company orders. If DL supplies the pilots with 30 321s, the pilots have to fly them.

alasizon wrote:

TTailedTiger wrote:

goboeing wrote:

Not sure what you mean by this.

Firm on what?

The pilots fly the planes that are ordered by the company.

The contract spells out pay rates and which fleets are separated into different pay categories and which ones are lumped together.

Now that three decades of engine technology can provide the same lift for more than 20% less fuel burn, the 757/767 is showing it's age at all carriers around the world,

The 321NEO even beats the 321CEO by something around 20%, so just imagine what it is compared to the 757-200. It's been an awesome airplane for a long time but the writing is on the wall.

It'll be logical for the average segment length of the 757 fleet to gradually decrease over the next few years as the 321 fleet continues to grow.

Like someone mentioned above, I would not be surprised if the 321XLR is ordered to some extent as the 797 is obviously not even a 'paper airplane' yet.

What are you not understanding? The pilots are not going to let planes with a higher pay rate go away and be replaced by something with a lesser pay rate. And Delta isn't going to pay widebody wages for a narrowbody plane that can't accommodate nearly as many passengers. Widebodies create upward mobility on the seniority list. It's one of the reasons United's pilots have held firm on not allowing more international flying to be done by partners. They know it will mean fewer widebody positions.

DL's pilots have zero control over what aircraft the company orders. If DL supplies the pilots with 30 321s, the pilots have to fly them.

But they negotiate the pay rates, and if they don't get rates they want, they'll not sign a contract.

alasizon wrote:

TTailedTiger wrote:

goboeing wrote:

Not sure what you mean by this.

Firm on what?

The pilots fly the planes that are ordered by the company.

The contract spells out pay rates and which fleets are separated into different pay categories and which ones are lumped together.

Now that three decades of engine technology can provide the same lift for more than 20% less fuel burn, the 757/767 is showing it's age at all carriers around the world,

The 321NEO even beats the 321CEO by something around 20%, so just imagine what it is compared to the 757-200. It's been an awesome airplane for a long time but the writing is on the wall.

It'll be logical for the average segment length of the 757 fleet to gradually decrease over the next few years as the 321 fleet continues to grow.

Like someone mentioned above, I would not be surprised if the 321XLR is ordered to some extent as the 797 is obviously not even a 'paper airplane' yet.

What are you not understanding? The pilots are not going to let planes with a higher pay rate go away and be replaced by something with a lesser pay rate. And Delta isn't going to pay widebody wages for a narrowbody plane that can't accommodate nearly as many passengers. Widebodies create upward mobility on the seniority list. It's one of the reasons United's pilots have held firm on not allowing more international flying to be done by partners. They know it will mean fewer widebody positions.

DL's pilots have zero control over what aircraft the company orders. If DL supplies the pilots with 30 321s, the pilots have to fly them.

Obviously you don't remember the DL 777 debacle.

JAMBOJET wrote:

BNAMealer wrote:

AirFiero wrote:

On the subject of focus cities, I asked this question in another thread but answers may have been moderated out - has there been any actual growth at any of the focus cities since the announcement? If the largest percentage of revenue growth is expected to be in this area, I’d presume we’d see more flights, new routes or at least additional frequencies and/or upguaging.

Other than some upgauging and some hub frequency increases, I don’t think so, unless you count KL adding AUS as growth.

Not really understanding the strategy here.

I think the strategy was hope that aa and ua don’t respond. The strongest of the big 3 in AUS already did respond. Delta is the weakest of the Big 3 in California, remains to be seen how SJC will work out.
Delta is strong in the NE (BOS focus city) and very strong in the SE (RDU focus city).
Going into AUS or SJC was always going to be tough given the complete lack of a strong presence anywhere nearby.
Now that AA responded in AUS, it’ll be interesting to see how Delta responds. Feels like a losing battle for Delta but they have plenty of cash to burn if they want.

DL could easily win the AUS battle if they want to, they just seem to have priorities elsewhere. However, due to the lack of a nearby strong presence, they are gonna have to build a small hub if they want to win, simply adding a few p2p routes isn’t gonna cut it. If they go that route, AA won’t be able to respond.

SJC is a waste of time with SFO right up the road.

goboeing wrote:

TTailedTiger wrote:

Yeah I don't think the pilots will allow 767's to be replaced by the A321. They are pretty firm when it comes to widebody replacement.

Not sure what you mean by this.

Firm on what?

The pilots fly the planes that are ordered by the company.

The contract spells out pay rates and which fleets are separated into different pay categories and which ones are lumped together.

Now that three decades of engine technology can provide the same lift for more than 20% less fuel burn, the 757/767 is showing it's age at all carriers around the world,

The 321NEO even beats the 321CEO by something around 20%, so just imagine what it is compared to the 757-200. It's been an awesome airplane for a long time but the writing is on the wall.

It'll be logical for the average segment length of the 757 fleet to gradually decrease over the next few years as the 321 fleet continues to grow.

Like someone mentioned above, I would not be surprised if the 321XLR is ordered to some extent as the 797 is obviously not even a 'paper airplane' yet.

The CEO uses 30 year old engines though.

BNAMealer wrote:

JAMBOJET wrote:

BNAMealer wrote:

Other than some upgauging and some hub frequency increases, I don’t think so, unless you count KL adding AUS as growth.

Not really understanding the strategy here.

I think the strategy was hope that aa and ua don’t respond. The strongest of the big 3 in AUS already did respond. Delta is the weakest of the Big 3 in California, remains to be seen how SJC will work out.
Delta is strong in the NE (BOS focus city) and very strong in the SE (RDU focus city).
Going into AUS or SJC was always going to be tough given the complete lack of a strong presence anywhere nearby.
Now that AA responded in AUS, it’ll be interesting to see how Delta responds. Feels like a losing battle for Delta but they have plenty of cash to burn if they want.

DL could easily win the AUS battle if they want to, they just seem to have priorities elsewhere. However, due to the lack of a nearby strong presence, they are gonna have to build a small hub if they want to win, simply adding a few p2p routes isn’t gonna cut it. If they go that route, AA won’t be able to respond.

SJC is a waste of time with SFO right up the road.

I agree with your overall point that delta could build a mini hub, in theory, in aus and aa/UA wouldnt respond to that degree, but the reality is Aus isn’t big enough for a mini hub nor does delta have enough gates to build one unless they know about some new terminal project no one else Does.

alasizon wrote:

TTailedTiger wrote:

goboeing wrote:

Not sure what you mean by this.

Firm on what?

The pilots fly the planes that are ordered by the company.

The contract spells out pay rates and which fleets are separated into different pay categories and which ones are lumped together.

Now that three decades of engine technology can provide the same lift for more than 20% less fuel burn, the 757/767 is showing it's age at all carriers around the world,

The 321NEO even beats the 321CEO by something around 20%, so just imagine what it is compared to the 757-200. It's been an awesome airplane for a long time but the writing is on the wall.

It'll be logical for the average segment length of the 757 fleet to gradually decrease over the next few years as the 321 fleet continues to grow.

Like someone mentioned above, I would not be surprised if the 321XLR is ordered to some extent as the 797 is obviously not even a 'paper airplane' yet.

What are you not understanding? The pilots are not going to let planes with a higher pay rate go away and be replaced by something with a lesser pay rate. And Delta isn't going to pay widebody wages for a narrowbody plane that can't accommodate nearly as many passengers. Widebodies create upward mobility on the seniority list. It's one of the reasons United's pilots have held firm on not allowing more international flying to be done by partners. They know it will mean fewer widebody positions.

DL's pilots have zero control over what aircraft the company orders. If DL supplies the pilots with 30 321s, the pilots have to fly them.

That is not exactly true. Their Scope section has a section on joint ventures. There is a ratio of Widebody flying at DL vs Virgin/Korean/KLM/AF etc....In other words like TTail said they are protecting their highest paid flying.

bkflyguy wrote:

I don't think they distinguish between ceo/neo for fleet families because most systems and components are the same. Also not clear is whether they are also counting regional planes.

Could it be?

A220-100
A220-300
A320neo
A321neo
A330neo
A350 XWB
Boeing 737-900
Boeing 777

CriticalPoint wrote:

alasizon wrote:

TTailedTiger wrote:

What are you not understanding? The pilots are not going to let planes with a higher pay rate go away and be replaced by something with a lesser pay rate. And Delta isn't going to pay widebody wages for a narrowbody plane that can't accommodate nearly as many passengers. Widebodies create upward mobility on the seniority list. It's one of the reasons United's pilots have held firm on not allowing more international flying to be done by partners. They know it will mean fewer widebody positions.

DL's pilots have zero control over what aircraft the company orders. If DL supplies the pilots with 30 321s, the pilots have to fly them.

That is not exactly true. Their Scope section has a section on joint ventures. There is a ratio of Widebody flying at DL vs Virgin/Korean/KLM/AF etc....In other words like TTail said they are protecting their highest paid flying.

As long as the RASK requirement is met for the Atlantic and the block hours are met for the Pacific, there is nothing that the pilots really can say the JVs violate from what I recall. Now the fact that DL hasn't been in compliance since day 1 is a separate issue. For the Pacific we know that DL has to use widebodies to do that flying so it's not like all the widebodies are going to disappear.

My point is that the pilots themselves have zero control over the aircraft the company purchases, now if they are unhappy with the future fleet mix and feel that it is important enough to raise other pay rates to help steer things towards using widebodies then so be it. However, 2 East Coast-Europe NB runs pay more overall (and require more pilots) than a single WB run on the same route. There are pluses and minuses on both sides.

Alias1024 wrote:

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

I think some of that regarding fleet simplification as discussed on the investor day presentation was a bit of a softball response.
After all, they are highlight strategy and vision that they've already started to execute.

The decisions were already in motion to sunset the MD-88 and MD-90 fleet types.
The 757 and 767s are entering the twilight of their career
717s are gone in a decade (or less)
A330 CEOs, actually they have another decade, they will just turn into what the 767 fleet is today. Far too big a captial investment at this time to consider replacement, considering they have a lot to do in terms of addressing the 757 and 767 fleets.
A319 / A320 will just retire out organically as they age-out.

A lot of these simplifications were going to happen anyways over the next decade as many of the legacy fleet types reach their retirements.

Agreed. The A330 CEOs should still have plenty of life in them, especially given the commonality with the A330 NEOs that are joining the fleet. I actually wonder about the longevity of the 77L past the middle of the next decade.

The 77Es have probably seen their replacements already ordered in the form of the 10 deferred A350s. That leaves a 777 fleet of just 8 aircraft, with the capabilities of the 77L only really utilized fully on ATL-JNB and LAX-SYD. Perhaps the 77L might see an early exit in favor of more A350s (LATAM delivery slots?) since running a small fleet for those routes will be inefficient from a maintenance, pilot training, and pilot scheduling standpoint.

Don't forget JFK-BOM, which starts on 12/22.

But the brakes on the 321NEO at DAL - at least as a trans-Atlantic option. Bastian specifically said today that the company does not buy into the belief that the "narrowbody" 321NEO is the right answer that AA and UA beleive it is. And in same span he talked about Boeing needing to launch the NMA.

BNAMealer wrote:

Pudelhund wrote:

BNAMealer wrote:

What will replace the 77E and the A330ceo fleet?

A359 and A339 presumably. They might be interested in the 787 as well, but that would go against the whole simplification idea.

DL isn’t getting the 787 at this point, they’ve made it clear with their actions all of their eggs are in the A330/350 basket for now.

I expect an order for the A321XLR to replace the 757s soon.

BNAMealer wrote:

JAMBOJET wrote:

BNAMealer wrote:

Other than some upgauging and some hub frequency increases, I don’t think so, unless you count KL adding AUS as growth.

Not really understanding the strategy here.

I think the strategy was hope that aa and ua don’t respond. The strongest of the big 3 in AUS already did respond. Delta is the weakest of the Big 3 in California, remains to be seen how SJC will work out.
Delta is strong in the NE (BOS focus city) and very strong in the SE (RDU focus city).
Going into AUS or SJC was always going to be tough given the complete lack of a strong presence anywhere nearby.
Now that AA responded in AUS, it’ll be interesting to see how Delta responds. Feels like a losing battle for Delta but they have plenty of cash to burn if they want.

DL could easily win the AUS battle if they want to, they just seem to have priorities elsewhere. However, due to the lack of a nearby strong presence, they are gonna have to build a small hub if they want to win, simply adding a few p2p routes isn’t gonna cut it. If they go that route, AA won’t be able to respond.

SJC is a waste of time with SFO right up the road.

It depends on what DL has planned. DL isn’t exactly a powerhouse at SFO. They could move some frequencies to SJC, or even go big. Or...do nothing but press releases.

Interesting that SJC is farther from SFO than FLL is from MIA given all of the posters over the years that have criticized UA/DL for missing their opportunity to invest in building a hub at FLL before the LCCs moved in.

n7371f wrote:

But the brakes on the 321NEO at DAL - at least as a trans-Atlantic option. Bastian specifically said today that the company does not buy into the belief that the "narrowbody" 321NEO is the right answer that AA and UA beleive it is. And in same span he talked about Boeing needing to launch the NMA.

BNAMealer wrote:

Pudelhund wrote:

A359 and A339 presumably. They might be interested in the 787 as well, but that would go against the whole simplification idea.

DL isn’t getting the 787 at this point, they’ve made it clear with their actions all of their eggs are in the A330/350 basket for now.

I expect an order for the A321XLR to replace the 757s soon.

I don't know what to make of this. Could they really be interested in repairing their relationship with Boeing? Even if Boeing did launch the NMA (I think they should, shake off the recent problems), would they be able to offer it at a low enough price for Delta to order any? Part of me thinks Delta is just trying to scare Airbus into not jacking up the price of the A321XLR too much. If Boeing does build the NMA then I think there will likely be some stiff requirements. They can't afford to build this plane without 100% commitment from customers.

bkflyguy wrote:

I don't think they distinguish between ceo/neo for fleet families because most systems and components are the same. Also not clear is whether they are also counting regional planes. Assuming no distinction between ceo/neo and including regional I came up with:

Current fleet families (13):
717
737NG (700/800/900ER)
757
767 (300ER/400)
777 (ER/LR)
A220 (200/300)
A320 (319/320/321)
A330 (200/300/900)
A350
MD88
MD90
E170/175
CRJ200/700/900

I think you are correct about counting regional planes in the fleet since there is no other way the average seat count for the fleet could have been 97 in 2009 and 114 in 2014.

But, another thing to notice is that it doesn't say the fleet size is 13 TODAY, but instead says the fleet size will be 13 at 2020 year end (2020E). It sounds like the MD88 and MD90 fleets will be gone by 2020E, so they aren't included in the 13.

So, I am thinking the listed 13 aircraft types to be in the fleet at 2020E are
CRJ-200/700/900
E-170/175
B-717
A220-100/-300
B-737-700/-800/-900 NG (all CFM)
A319/320/321 CEO (all CFM)
A321 NEO
B-757 (all P&W)
B-767 (with a mix of P&W and GE engines)
A330-200/-300 (with a mix of P&W (older ships) and GE engines (the newer HGW ships))
A330-900 NEO (all RR engines)
A350-900 (all RR engines)
B-777 (with a mix of RR and GE engines)

The goal of only 8 aircraft types at some unknown future date is probably way in the future. But, if Delta does shed 5 aircraft types in the next 10+ years, I could see that being
CRJ
B-717
B-757
B-767
B-777

And they might shed the A319/320 CEOs, but keep the A321 CEO so that fleet would shrink but not disappear. Maybe A320NEOs and/or A220-500 eventually get added, but those would be additions to existing fleets.

Also, maybe Delta gets the Boeing NMA as a B-767 replacement for trans-Atlantic flights. If not, I expect they will trim the number of European cities served non-stop from the USA and replace the B-767 fleet with a smaller fleet of A330s and A350s, and expect more pax to connect in places like AMS, CDG, FCO, LHR (i.e. more hub to hub flying). After all the Delta pilots union has been asking for more "large wide body" aircraft in the DL fleet (i.e. planes bigger than the B-767), so they just might get that, although upgauging would likely reduce the number of planes in the fleet and the number of pilots needed. Fewer pilots overall, but at a higher average salary might placate the membership.

I might be missing something here but there doesn't seem to be that much of a difference in seatcounts between a 767-300 and a A330-200 especially once the fleet is retrofitted with premium economy. I could see DL taking up a few A330-800 that would give some confidence in the program...

JAMBOJET wrote:

I agree with your overall point that delta could build a mini hub, in theory, in aus and aa/UA wouldnt respond to that degree, but the reality is Aus isn’t big enough for a mini hub nor does delta have enough gates to build one unless they know about some new terminal project no one else Does.

AUS is most certainly big enough for a hub due to the strong local economy and the large catchment area it serves, which includes parts of SAT. They will be building a whole new concourse, doubling the amount of gates in the next decade. Beyond that, there is enough space where AUS could theoretically be built out to 150+ gates.

The problem is not that they aren’t capable, it’s that DL doesn’t seem interested and has their priorities elsewhere. The whole focus city designation seems to be a PR stunt.

AirFiero wrote:

BNAMealer wrote:

DL could easily win the AUS battle if they want to, they just seem to have priorities elsewhere. However, due to the lack of a nearby strong presence, they are gonna have to build a small hub if they want to win, simply adding a few p2p routes isn’t gonna cut it. If they go that route, AA won’t be able to respond.

SJC is a waste of time with SFO right up the road.

It depends on what DL has planned. DL isn’t exactly a powerhouse at SFO. They could move some frequencies to SJC, or even go big. Or...do nothing but press releases.

My point was SJC service has traditionally struggled with SFO right up the road and it will be difficult to compete with the UA hub there. Regardless of what people may say about traffic, it appears SFO is still the preferred airport in the region.

ifIHadWings wrote:

The goal of only 8 aircraft types at some unknown future date is probably way in the future. But, if Delta does shed 5 aircraft types in the next 10+ years, I could see that being
CRJ
B-717
B-757
B-767
B-777

Welcome to a.net.

I'm skeptical that CRJs will be going away, even in a 10-year window. They had new CR9 deliveries this year and more are committed for 2020. I'd call it plausible if aggressive to replace 91 717s by 2029 - no doubt A220s make them look thirsty but replacements may not be the top priority for CapEx. Short range isn't a problem, either - there's a near infinite list of routes out of LGA/ATL/DTW/MSP where practical 1000sm range is fine. I think the 77Ls will live past that year, too.

Fewer mainline types really should improve pilot scheduling and utilization. It just takes a lot of money to go from where they are today to eight types.

TTailedTiger wrote:

alasizon wrote:

TTailedTiger wrote:

What are you not understanding? The pilots are not going to let planes with a higher pay rate go away and be replaced by something with a lesser pay rate. And Delta isn't going to pay widebody wages for a narrowbody plane that can't accommodate nearly as many passengers. Widebodies create upward mobility on the seniority list. It's one of the reasons United's pilots have held firm on not allowing more international flying to be done by partners. They know it will mean fewer widebody positions.

DL's pilots have zero control over what aircraft the company orders. If DL supplies the pilots with 30 321s, the pilots have to fly them.

Obviously you don't remember the DL 777 debacle.

I do remember the 777 debacle and I don’t know if you remember but our contract was changed to prevent us holding up a jet over pay rates (Section 3 of the PWA). As a Delta pilot we do not have control over what Delta buys. We fly whatever they send our way. 321XLR to replace 757s, thy will be done. 321XLRs to replace 763s, they can do it if they want (not that they would).

BNAMealer wrote:

JAMBOJET wrote:

I agree with your overall point that delta could build a mini hub, in theory, in aus and aa/UA wouldnt respond to that degree, but the reality is Aus isn’t big enough for a mini hub nor does delta have enough gates to build one unless they know about some new terminal project no one else Does.

They will be building a whole new concourse, doubling the amount of gates in the next decade. Beyond that, there is enough space where AUS could theoretically be built out to 150+ gates.

The whole focus city designation seems to be a PR stunt.

“Next decade” is the key term. Austin doesn’t have the gates for delta to do a mini hub or much of anything anytime in the near future, regardless of the size of the local economy and two megahubs next door.
Agreed on the PR stunt. Delta simply has a fancy way of describing second and third place in new markets.

JAMBOJET wrote:

Delta is the weakest of the Big 3 in California, remains to be seen how SJC will work out.
Going into AUS or SJC was always going to be tough given the complete lack of a strong presence anywhere nearby.
Now that AA responded in AUS, it’ll be interesting to see how Delta responds. Feels like a losing battle for Delta but they have plenty of cash to burn if they want.

DL already has a hub at LAX, and there are many non-DL hub destinations that already have nonstop service out of LAX on DL.

Here are the non-DL hub destinations that DL currently serves nonstop from LAX: ABQ, AUS, BOI, CUN, CVG, CMH, DFW, DEN, GUA, HNL, IND, OGG, MCI, LAS, LIR, LIH, MEM, MEX, BNA, MSY, OMA, MCO, CDG, PHX, PDX, PVR, RDU, SMF, SAT, SAN, SFO, SJC, SJD, SJO, PVG, GEG, SYD, TPA, HND, TUS, DCA

There are also still more nonstop routes out of LAX that could be added by DL such as LAX-BUF, LAX-CLT, LAX-ORD, LAX-CLE, LAX-ELP, LAX-FLL, LAX-IAH, LAX-MKE, LAX-OKC, LAX-PHL, LAX-PIT, LAX-RNO, and LAX-STL.