patrickjp93
Posts: 648
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2019 12:00 pm

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Tue Jan 14, 2020 3:00 am

MIflyer12 wrote:
Delta has more A350s than 777LRs, has had A350s for 2 1/2 years, has all the performance data, and yet chooses to use 777LRs on the route. You really need to dial up your analytical and rhetorical skills if you want to make a compelling argument they're doing it wrong.

You really need a solid education in corporate business practices. ROI. The 777-200LR aftermarket is zero value. They can't be sold to anyone, so the only other option is to run them into the ground. However, that does come with the question of why they'd fly such a long route on such an inefficient bird. There is no member of Sky Team that flies an A350 into Sydney, therefore Delta would have to pay top dollar to Singapore Airlines or someone else to get hangar and maintenance resources. There are plenty of 777s flying into Sydney from all 3 alliances, meaning that commonality benefits from a local economy of scale.

If the engineers ruled the roost, airlines would lose money without a doubt. Sometimes the most optimal solution is not one that makes sense financially. Unless fuel prices spike up that badly, they can keep taking the profits on the route that they have and hold off on increasing their operational costs at Sydney. Sheesh and I'm supposed to be cold-hearted engineer on this forum, not the one explaining Business 101 to someone who thinks insults make for good arguments.
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6573
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Wed Jan 15, 2020 12:08 am

The 77L can carry a good deal more payload than the 359 on this particular route. The 77Ls used on the route are freshly refurbished so the passenger experience is similar to the 350. I have no doubt that the green eyeshades have done the math and that the 77L can generate enough extra revenue on the route that flying it here is a better overall financial decision than flying it somewhere else.
 
DylanHarvey
Posts: 189
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 5:45 pm

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Wed Jan 15, 2020 3:10 am

seabosdca wrote:
The 77L can carry a good deal more payload than the 359 on this particular route. The 77Ls used on the route are freshly refurbished so the passenger experience is similar to the 350. I have no doubt that the green eyeshades have done the math and that the 77L can generate enough extra revenue on the route that flying it here is a better overall financial decision than flying it somewhere else.

This is one of the 3 routes where the 77L's ridiculous payload range is nice. Remember the A359 is a ~6000nm aircraft at MZFW, the 77L is 7600nm. It aligns, JNB, SYD, and PVG are some of DL's most lucrative cargo destinations, so having 50t+ of available payload while needing to go 15hrs is handy
 
777Mech
Posts: 858
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 10:54 pm

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Wed Jan 15, 2020 3:24 am

patrickjp93 wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
Delta has more A350s than 777LRs, has had A350s for 2 1/2 years, has all the performance data, and yet chooses to use 777LRs on the route. You really need to dial up your analytical and rhetorical skills if you want to make a compelling argument they're doing it wrong.

You really need a solid education in corporate business practices. ROI. The 777-200LR aftermarket is zero value. They can't be sold to anyone, so the only other option is to run them into the ground. However, that does come with the question of why they'd fly such a long route on such an inefficient bird. There is no member of Sky Team that flies an A350 into Sydney, therefore Delta would have to pay top dollar to Singapore Airlines or someone else to get hangar and maintenance resources. There are plenty of 777s flying into Sydney from all 3 alliances, meaning that commonality benefits from a local economy of scale.

If the engineers ruled the roost, airlines would lose money without a doubt. Sometimes the most optimal solution is not one that makes sense financially. Unless fuel prices spike up that badly, they can keep taking the profits on the route that they have and hold off on increasing their operational costs at Sydney. Sheesh and I'm supposed to be cold-hearted engineer on this forum, not the one explaining Business 101 to someone who thinks insults make for good arguments.


Coming from a person that thought DL was operating 777-300s.

Anyways, why would DL need SQ for MX services? They have a contract MX provider there, and if a hangar is needed, DL has used the QF hangars in the past. Airlines do this all over the world.
 
patrickjp93
Posts: 648
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2019 12:00 pm

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Wed Jan 15, 2020 12:43 pm

777Mech wrote:
patrickjp93 wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
Delta has more A350s than 777LRs, has had A350s for 2 1/2 years, has all the performance data, and yet chooses to use 777LRs on the route. You really need to dial up your analytical and rhetorical skills if you want to make a compelling argument they're doing it wrong.

You really need a solid education in corporate business practices. ROI. The 777-200LR aftermarket is zero value. They can't be sold to anyone, so the only other option is to run them into the ground. However, that does come with the question of why they'd fly such a long route on such an inefficient bird. There is no member of Sky Team that flies an A350 into Sydney, therefore Delta would have to pay top dollar to Singapore Airlines or someone else to get hangar and maintenance resources. There are plenty of 777s flying into Sydney from all 3 alliances, meaning that commonality benefits from a local economy of scale.

If the engineers ruled the roost, airlines would lose money without a doubt. Sometimes the most optimal solution is not one that makes sense financially. Unless fuel prices spike up that badly, they can keep taking the profits on the route that they have and hold off on increasing their operational costs at Sydney. Sheesh and I'm supposed to be cold-hearted engineer on this forum, not the one explaining Business 101 to someone who thinks insults make for good arguments.


Coming from a person that thought DL was operating 777-300s.

Anyways, why would DL need SQ for MX services? They have a contract MX provider there, and if a hangar is needed, DL has used the QF hangars in the past. Airlines do this all over the world.

Fine, I slipped up on 200 vs. 300. Happy?

Specifically maintenance of A350s. From what I can tell the only A350 game in town there at the moment is SQ's people, and their maintenance is basically an in-house team through a subsidiary. Sure, DL's MX firm could build out the infra, but for a lone client, that's either going to be very expensive for DL, or very low margin for the MX team.
 
User avatar
MaxiAir
Posts: 289
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 7:32 pm

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Wed Jan 15, 2020 4:02 pm

patrickjp93 wrote:
777Mech wrote:
patrickjp93 wrote:
You really need a solid education in corporate business practices. ROI. The 777-200LR aftermarket is zero value. They can't be sold to anyone, so the only other option is to run them into the ground. However, that does come with the question of why they'd fly such a long route on such an inefficient bird. There is no member of Sky Team that flies an A350 into Sydney, therefore Delta would have to pay top dollar to Singapore Airlines or someone else to get hangar and maintenance resources. There are plenty of 777s flying into Sydney from all 3 alliances, meaning that commonality benefits from a local economy of scale.

If the engineers ruled the roost, airlines would lose money without a doubt. Sometimes the most optimal solution is not one that makes sense financially. Unless fuel prices spike up that badly, they can keep taking the profits on the route that they have and hold off on increasing their operational costs at Sydney. Sheesh and I'm supposed to be cold-hearted engineer on this forum, not the one explaining Business 101 to someone who thinks insults make for good arguments.


Coming from a person that thought DL was operating 777-300s.

Anyways, why would DL need SQ for MX services? They have a contract MX provider there, and if a hangar is needed, DL has used the QF hangars in the past. Airlines do this all over the world.

Fine, I slipped up on 200 vs. 300. Happy?

Specifically maintenance of A350s. From what I can tell the only A350 game in town there at the moment is SQ's people, and their maintenance is basically an in-house team through a subsidiary. Sure, DL's MX firm could build out the infra, but for a lone client, that's either going to be very expensive for DL, or very low margin for the MX team.



The only A350 in Sydney? They have Qatar, Cathay, Fiji in Oneworld operating the 350 to Sydney, despite that you have China Airlines and China Eastern (Skyteam).
Its funny, because the only operator you mentioned does NOT operated the A350 there. SQ is operating a mix of 777 and A380.

From a financial standpoint you need to operate those 77L where they don't hurt yields too much. Using the A350 as a more efficient alternative might improve financial results of the SYD route, but when changing the 77L to a route, the A350 currently serves this route might turn red and so you put the least efficient aircraft where they hurt the least. Common practice when accounting on a route per route basis.
Flown on - 306,313,318,319,320,321,332,333,343,345,346,359,35K,388, 712,733,734,735,736,73G,738,744,748,752,753,763,77E,77L,77W, 788, 789, M11, M1F, M88, CR7,CR9, E35,E45,E75,E90,E95, AR1,AR8, DHT,DH1,DH4, and some more ;)
 
777Mech
Posts: 858
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 10:54 pm

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Thu Jan 16, 2020 4:59 am

patrickjp93 wrote:
777Mech wrote:
patrickjp93 wrote:
You really need a solid education in corporate business practices. ROI. The 777-200LR aftermarket is zero value. They can't be sold to anyone, so the only other option is to run them into the ground. However, that does come with the question of why they'd fly such a long route on such an inefficient bird. There is no member of Sky Team that flies an A350 into Sydney, therefore Delta would have to pay top dollar to Singapore Airlines or someone else to get hangar and maintenance resources. There are plenty of 777s flying into Sydney from all 3 alliances, meaning that commonality benefits from a local economy of scale.

If the engineers ruled the roost, airlines would lose money without a doubt. Sometimes the most optimal solution is not one that makes sense financially. Unless fuel prices spike up that badly, they can keep taking the profits on the route that they have and hold off on increasing their operational costs at Sydney. Sheesh and I'm supposed to be cold-hearted engineer on this forum, not the one explaining Business 101 to someone who thinks insults make for good arguments.


Coming from a person that thought DL was operating 777-300s.

Anyways, why would DL need SQ for MX services? They have a contract MX provider there, and if a hangar is needed, DL has used the QF hangars in the past. Airlines do this all over the world.

Fine, I slipped up on 200 vs. 300. Happy?

Specifically maintenance of A350s. From what I can tell the only A350 game in town there at the moment is SQ's people, and their maintenance is basically an in-house team through a subsidiary. Sure, DL's MX firm could build out the infra, but for a lone client, that's either going to be very expensive for DL, or very low margin for the MX team.


Most contract MX companies have multiple clients, and DL will send the contract MX mechanics for A350 training in ATL if DL ever decides to send the plane there. It's really not as big of a deal as you make it out to be.
 
hkcanadaexpat
Posts: 4015
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 3:33 am

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Thu Jan 16, 2020 9:00 am

Here are the DL widebody tables for the Winter 2019-20 Season

Image

Image

Image

Key Observations on how things have changed over the past 12 months
Fleet
- Retirement of the final 2 Domestic 763s (non-ERs)
- Completion of the 777 fleet conversion to Delta Suites
- Progress on 764 fleet conversion to Delta Suites
- Delivery of first 339 aircraft

Routes
- New Widebody Winter Routes: ATL-BOG; ATL-MCO; ATL-SJU; MSP-ICN; JFK-AMS (#3); JFK-BOM; JFK-DSS; SEA-ATL; SLC-LHR
- Widebody Routes Discontinued: ATL-LAX (#2); ATL-LHR (#3); DTW-GRU; DTW-LHR (#2); HNL-FUK; LAX-AMS; JFK-SFO; MCO-GRU; SLC-MCO; NRT-SIN

Hubs (excludes any offsets from JVP flying)
- ATL: flat capacity; capacity lost reallocated to other routes
- BOS: small increase in capacity as BOS-LHR is upgauged
- DTW: capacity drop; 2 routes lost GRU/LHR #2
- HNL: capacity drop; FUK route lost
- LAX: capacity drop; AMS route lost
- MSP: capacity increases; new route
- JFK: capacity increase; new routes + additional rotations
- SLC: capacity increase; new route + upgauge
- SEA: significant capacity increase; new route + 339 upgauge
 
blacksoviet
Posts: 1392
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2016 10:50 am

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Sun Jan 19, 2020 2:59 am

When was the last widebody in the deltaflot livery repainted in the current livery?
 
blacksoviet
Posts: 1392
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2016 10:50 am

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:02 am

777Mech wrote:
patrickjp93 wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
Delta has more A350s than 777LRs, has had A350s for 2 1/2 years, has all the performance data, and yet chooses to use 777LRs on the route. You really need to dial up your analytical and rhetorical skills if you want to make a compelling argument they're doing it wrong.

You really need a solid education in corporate business practices. ROI. The 777-200LR aftermarket is zero value. They can't be sold to anyone, so the only other option is to run them into the ground. However, that does come with the question of why they'd fly such a long route on such an inefficient bird. There is no member of Sky Team that flies an A350 into Sydney, therefore Delta would have to pay top dollar to Singapore Airlines or someone else to get hangar and maintenance resources. There are plenty of 777s flying into Sydney from all 3 alliances, meaning that commonality benefits from a local economy of scale.

If the engineers ruled the roost, airlines would lose money without a doubt. Sometimes the most optimal solution is not one that makes sense financially. Unless fuel prices spike up that badly, they can keep taking the profits on the route that they have and hold off on increasing their operational costs at Sydney. Sheesh and I'm supposed to be cold-hearted engineer on this forum, not the one explaining Business 101 to someone who thinks insults make for good arguments.


Coming from a person that thought DL was operating 777-300s.

Anyways, why would DL need SQ for MX services? They have a contract MX provider there, and if a hangar is needed, DL has used the QF hangars in the past. Airlines do this all over the world.

How much does QF charge DL to rent their hangar?
 
panamair
Posts: 4134
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 2:24 am

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:31 am

hkcanadaexpat wrote:
Here are the DL widebody tables for the Winter 2019-20 Season

Image


Thanks for this! Just a very small point, for the 764DS, it’s 28 Comfort Plus and 156 Main Cabin seats, not 21 and 163.
 
hkcanadaexpat
Posts: 4015
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 3:33 am

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Tue Jan 21, 2020 12:54 am

1/13-1/19 Period
Total Fleet: 154
Scheduled Service: 126/154
Spares: 11/154 (6x76Z; 2x764; 1x764(DS); 2x333)
Conversion: 6/154 (1x [email protected]; 3x [email protected]; 2x [email protected])
Maintenance/Paint: 10/154 ([email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected])
Induction/Storage: 1/154 ([email protected])

Highlights
> Weather event in NYC on 1/18 caused extensive delays on flight out of JFK to BCN, DUB, DSS, FCO, FRA, GRU, LAX, LHR, MXP and ZRH
> 764 N826MH exited mods in CAN on 1/18 (#6/21)

Flight/Route Changes
> ATL-STR (116/117) from 764 to 76Z effective 1/16

Upgrades from narrowbody fleet
1/13: LAX-SLC; SAN-ATL; JFK-SLC-JFK; ATL-MCO-ATL
1/14: ATL-SAN; SLC-LAX; ATL-MCO-ATL
1/15: JFK-SFO; ATL-MCO-ATL
1/16: JFK-SFO-JFK; JFK-SFO-JFK; ATL-SFO-ATL; SFO-JFK
1/17: ATL-BOS-ATL; ATL-SFO-ATL; JFK-SLC-JFK; MSP-ATL
1/18: ATL-SFO-ATL; JFK-SLC-JFK
1/19: ATL-SFO-ATL; MCO-ATL-MCO

Charters
1/14: ATL-MSY-GSP-ATL (NCAAF)
1/15: ATL-ELP-BWI-ATL (military)
1/18-20: ATL-GRB-SJC-GRB-MSP (NFL)
1/19-21: LAX-NGU-HHN-KWI-HHN-BWI-LAX (military)

Noteworthy Diversions
1/14: LAX-PVG -> LAX (tech)
1/16: ATL-HNL -> ATL (tech)
1/17: AMS-SLC -> YEG (medical)
1/17: JNB-ATL -> MIA (fuel)
1/18: SYD-LAX -> HNL (medical)

Flight Cancellations
1/13: NRT-MNL (volcano)
1/15: MAD-ATL
1/16: SEA-PEK
1/18: GIG-ATL
1/19: NRT-PDX; JNB-ATL
 
TW870
Posts: 1076
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 2:01 am

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Wed Jan 22, 2020 4:32 pm

I just read in another forum that the former Gulf Air 767-300ERs are being reconfigured into charter configuration for the NFL - much like some 757s were for the NBA. They are also not going to reconfigure all of the 76Ts (I forget what all of these designations mean - but I think those are the high-J birds), and instead park a few when they are do for an HMV. Source is apparently the January 757/767 pilot newsletter. Anyone know anything about this?
 
FSDan
Posts: 2786
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Wed Jan 22, 2020 6:52 pm

TW870 wrote:
I just read in another forum that the former Gulf Air 767-300ERs are being reconfigured into charter configuration for the NFL - much like some 757s were for the NBA. They are also not going to reconfigure all of the 76Ts (I forget what all of these designations mean - but I think those are the high-J birds), and instead park a few when they are do for an HMV. Source is apparently the January 757/767 pilot newsletter. Anyone know anything about this?


Aren't the Gulf Air 763s and the 76Ts one and the same? Any notes on the timeline for conversion/parking?
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
panamair
Posts: 4134
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 2:24 am

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Wed Jan 22, 2020 7:07 pm

FSDan wrote:
TW870 wrote:
I just read in another forum that the former Gulf Air 767-300ERs are being reconfigured into charter configuration for the NFL - much like some 757s were for the NBA. They are also not going to reconfigure all of the 76Ts (I forget what all of these designations mean - but I think those are the high-J birds), and instead park a few when they are do for an HMV. Source is apparently the January 757/767 pilot newsletter. Anyone know anything about this?


Aren't the Gulf Air 763s and the 76Ts one and the same? Any notes on the timeline for conversion/parking?


No, the GF 763s were converted to 76Zs when they installed the flat bed J seats- they are configured 26J/200Y and Y+. The GF ones are ships 1501-1506 and two of them have been retired already.

The 76Ts are the newest ones (ships 1607-1613) and have a pilot rest bunk and configured 36J/172Y and Y+.
 
hkcanadaexpat
Posts: 4015
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 3:33 am

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Wed Jan 22, 2020 8:01 pm

I doubt they would park the 76Ts. They are the youngest frames in the 763 fleet. The 76Ls were the ones first slated to be retired this winter but are now getting some maintenance done to allow them to operate throughout the Summer 2020 schedule at the very least. They now operate almost exclusively on the JFK-LAX route.

I know the 76T conversion to Delta Suites was put on hold in late 2019 as resources are concentrated/prioritized on the refresh of the 76Z (with prototype #188 in CAN currently).
 
jbs2886
Posts: 2215
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Wed Jan 22, 2020 8:49 pm

panamair wrote:
FSDan wrote:
TW870 wrote:
I just read in another forum that the former Gulf Air 767-300ERs are being reconfigured into charter configuration for the NFL - much like some 757s were for the NBA. They are also not going to reconfigure all of the 76Ts (I forget what all of these designations mean - but I think those are the high-J birds), and instead park a few when they are do for an HMV. Source is apparently the January 757/767 pilot newsletter. Anyone know anything about this?


Aren't the Gulf Air 763s and the 76Ts one and the same? Any notes on the timeline for conversion/parking?


No, the GF 763s were converted to 76Zs when they installed the flat bed J seats- they are configured 26J/200Y and Y+. The GF ones are ships 1501-1506 and two of them have been retired already.

The 76Ts are the newest ones (ships 1607-1613) and have a pilot rest bunk and configured 36J/172Y and Y+.


Its possible its the 2 retired birds (not sure if they have been acquired by a cargo carrier or scrapped), but many of the NBA 757s were previously retired.
 
TW870
Posts: 1076
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 2:01 am

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Wed Jan 22, 2020 11:34 pm

panamair wrote:
FSDan wrote:
TW870 wrote:
I just read in another forum that the former Gulf Air 767-300ERs are being reconfigured into charter configuration for the NFL - much like some 757s were for the NBA. They are also not going to reconfigure all of the 76Ts (I forget what all of these designations mean - but I think those are the high-J birds), and instead park a few when they are do for an HMV. Source is apparently the January 757/767 pilot newsletter. Anyone know anything about this?


Aren't the Gulf Air 763s and the 76Ts one and the same? Any notes on the timeline for conversion/parking?


No, the GF 763s were converted to 76Zs when they installed the flat bed J seats- they are configured 26J/200Y and Y+. The GF ones are ships 1501-1506 and two of them have been retired already.

The 76Ts are the newest ones (ships 1607-1613) and have a pilot rest bunk and configured 36J/172Y and Y+.


Apparently according to the pilots, the 76Ts are/were going to have the rest bunks removed (because the A339 fleet is taking over the longest routes), and then the airplanes were going to be reconfigured with updated cabins (and I think fewer J seats). Now, given the expense of all that work, they are going to park the airplanes when they come up for HMVs. However, someone else on the forum I read speculated that they would actually park older birds coming up for HMVs, and then reconfigure the 76Ts, pulling out the crew bunks. The overall takeaway is that it is likely a wash as far as total operative 767 fleet size goes, as the Gulf Air birds are going to continue to fly as NFL charter planes rather than be parked, and then some other -300ERs that were scheduled for refurbishment are now going to be pulled from the fleet.
 
hkcanadaexpat
Posts: 4015
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 3:33 am

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Fri Jan 24, 2020 10:04 pm

Further information is coming to light in terms of the near term future of the 76W fleet:

1) The 76L fleet (going through maintenance this Winter) looks to remain in place through the W20-21 schedule
2) The 76Z refurbishment will affect 32 frames with #180 being the oldest to go through the refurb
3) #188 is the prototype for the 76Z refurb; currently in CAN
4) Two more 76Z should go through refurb this Winter (subject suppliers), culminating in a fleet of 3 during S20 schedule
5) The 4x ex-Gulf 76Zs are not scheduled for refurb (could fit into the NFL rumor although no NFL refurb has yet been scheduled)
6) The fate of the 76T fleet as well as 5 ex-76Ts (which are some of the youngest 76Ws) remains unknown (i believe these 12x frames will eventually get Delta Suites)

So in terms of 76W retirement from pax service, we're probably looking at (subject to fuel and economic impacts as well as internal planning):
W20-21: 4x ex-Gulf (1502-06)
W21-22: 8x 76Ls (171-179)
W-22-23: 5x refurbed 76Zs (180-85)

Will be interesting to see what happens to the JFK-LAX route once the 76Ls retire. Will they go back to a mishmash of widebody types and 75Ws like before or will the outcome of the 76T fleet play into it?
 
NateGreat
Posts: 438
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2017 6:02 pm

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Sat Jan 25, 2020 9:30 am

Once all the SEA A330neo needs are fulfilled, which hubs will Delta start A330neo service from next, and likely to which destinations?
 
777Mech
Posts: 858
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 10:54 pm

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Sat Jan 25, 2020 12:01 pm

NateGreat wrote:
Once all the SEA A330neo needs are fulfilled, which hubs will Delta start A330neo service from next, and likely to which destinations?


LAX-TPAC/Europe.
 
User avatar
DL_Mech
Posts: 2362
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2000 7:48 am

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Sat Jan 25, 2020 3:25 pm

hkcanadaexpat wrote:
So in terms of 76W retirement from pax service, we're probably looking at (subject to fuel and economic impacts as well as internal planning):
W20-21: 4x ex-Gulf (1502-06)


1502 just came out of heavy MX on 23 January. I thought it was strange that they spent the money on that, but it will obviously increase the value of this (GE powered) frame on the freighter market.
This plane is built to withstand anything... except a bad pilot.
 
NateGreat
Posts: 438
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2017 6:02 pm

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Sat Jan 25, 2020 5:53 pm

777Mech wrote:
NateGreat wrote:
Once all the SEA A330neo needs are fulfilled, which hubs will Delta start A330neo service from next, and likely to which destinations?


LAX-TPAC/Europe.

Really? LAX is one of DL’s 2 777 bases (the other being ATL), and almost all of the TPAC flying out of LAX is 777 based. I would think a route like JFK-TLV would be a good candidate for the A339, as it currently uses the 242 tonne A333.
 
dstblj52
Posts: 142
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2019 8:38 pm

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Sat Jan 25, 2020 6:18 pm

NateGreat wrote:
777Mech wrote:
NateGreat wrote:
Once all the SEA A330neo needs are fulfilled, which hubs will Delta start A330neo service from next, and likely to which destinations?


LAX-TPAC/Europe.

Really? LAX is one of DL’s 2 777 bases (the other being ATL), and almost all of the TPAC flying out of LAX is 777 based. I would think a route like JFK-TLV would be a good candidate for the A339, as it currently uses the 242 tonne A333.

Look at longer A330/764 routes because their is a larger fuel burn advantage for longer flights
 
NateGreat
Posts: 438
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2017 6:02 pm

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Sat Jan 25, 2020 6:29 pm

dstblj52 wrote:
NateGreat wrote:
777Mech wrote:

LAX-TPAC/Europe.

Really? LAX is one of DL’s 2 777 bases (the other being ATL), and almost all of the TPAC flying out of LAX is 777 based. I would think a route like JFK-TLV would be a good candidate for the A339, as it currently uses the 242 tonne A333.

Look at longer A330/764 routes because their is a larger fuel burn advantage for longer flights

That’s why I don’t think LAX TPAC will be next, as that is all 777 based (as of right now at least). Anything operated by an A333 242 tonne, some of which are longer range routes, will be good candidates for the A339.
 
777Mech
Posts: 858
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 10:54 pm

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Sat Jan 25, 2020 9:49 pm

NateGreat wrote:
dstblj52 wrote:
NateGreat wrote:
Really? LAX is one of DL’s 2 777 bases (the other being ATL), and almost all of the TPAC flying out of LAX is 777 based. I would think a route like JFK-TLV would be a good candidate for the A339, as it currently uses the 242 tonne A333.

Look at longer A330/764 routes because their is a larger fuel burn advantage for longer flights

That’s why I don’t think LAX TPAC will be next, as that is all 777 based (as of right now at least). Anything operated by an A333 242 tonne, some of which are longer range routes, will be good candidates for the A339.


The only routes that really need the 242T is JFK-TLV, ATL-HNL and LAX-AMS/CDG. I do think they can bring down trip costs using the NEO out of LAX to TPAC. I think the TLV flight will stay on the 242T bird, as there really isn't a way to rotate a NEO in and out. Just look at what they have to do for BOM.

Wasn't LAX-HND on the 330 at some point?
 
NateGreat
Posts: 438
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2017 6:02 pm

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Sat Jan 25, 2020 9:57 pm

777Mech wrote:
NateGreat wrote:
dstblj52 wrote:
Look at longer A330/764 routes because their is a larger fuel burn advantage for longer flights

That’s why I don’t think LAX TPAC will be next, as that is all 777 based (as of right now at least). Anything operated by an A333 242 tonne, some of which are longer range routes, will be good candidates for the A339.


The only routes that really need the 242T is JFK-TLV, ATL-HNL and LAX-AMS/CDG. I do think they can bring down trip costs using the NEO out of LAX to TPAC. I think the TLV flight will stay on the 242T bird, as there really isn't a way to rotate a NEO in and out. Just look at what they have to do for BOM.

Wasn't LAX-HND on the 330 at some point?

If they do start to utilize the A339 on TPAC flights out of LAX (with the exception of the LAX-SYD route) like they’re doing in SEA, where would all the spare 777’s from LAX go? And to answer your question, yes it was. LAX-HND has bounced from 333 to 359 to 777 more times than I can count.
 
hkcanadaexpat
Posts: 4015
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 3:33 am

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Sat Jan 25, 2020 11:46 pm

There is more at play than simply swapping the longest 333 routes for 339s to save fuel. Bear in mind that the 339s have the Delta Suites products hence will most likely go on prestige routes where the premium seats are warranted at premium prices. Of course certain routes will use certain aircraft for purely/mostly technical reasons (LAX/JNB/BOM/NGO to name a few).

DL is currently building a widebody fleet that will have different products on similar sized aircraft.
1) <220 seats will see 76Zs (no Delta Suites) and 76Ts (with Delta Suites) [pending final decision on 76T fleet]
2) 230-240 seats will see 332s (no Delta Suites) and 764s (with Delta Suites)
[Obvious gap in the 250-270 seat segment]
3) 280-290 seats will see 339/777s (with Delta Suites) and 333s (no Delta Suites)
4) >300 seats will see 359s (with Delta Suites)

This will allow DL to segregate flights by premium demand and answer product specific competitor routes.
You can also foresee the future as the 76Zs get retired, the 332/333 will likely become the beach fleet.
 
jbs2886
Posts: 2215
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Sun Jan 26, 2020 12:33 am

hkcanadaexpat wrote:
There is more at play than simply swapping the longest 333 routes for 339s to save fuel. Bear in mind that the 339s have the Delta Suites products hence will most likely go on prestige routes where the premium seats are warranted at premium prices. Of course certain routes will use certain aircraft for purely/mostly technical reasons (LAX/JNB/BOM/NGO to name a few).

DL is currently building a widebody fleet that will have different products on similar sized aircraft.
1) <220 seats will see 76Zs (no Delta Suites) and 76Ts (with Delta Suites) [pending final decision on 76T fleet]
2) 230-240 seats will see 332s (no Delta Suites) and 764s (with Delta Suites)
[Obvious gap in the 250-270 seat segment]
3) 280-290 seats will see 339/777s (with Delta Suites) and 333s (no Delta Suites)
4) >300 seats will see 359s (with Delta Suites)

This will allow DL to segregate flights by premium demand and answer product specific competitor routes.
You can also foresee the future as the 76Zs get retired, the 332/333 will likely become the beach fleet.


Are they going to clearly designate the suites versus not? This seems contrary to the goal of running as consistent of a product as possible. Not that the old product is bad, but it certainly is inferior.
 
777Mech
Posts: 858
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 10:54 pm

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Sun Jan 26, 2020 4:39 am

NateGreat wrote:
777Mech wrote:
NateGreat wrote:
That’s why I don’t think LAX TPAC will be next, as that is all 777 based (as of right now at least). Anything operated by an A333 242 tonne, some of which are longer range routes, will be good candidates for the A339.


The only routes that really need the 242T is JFK-TLV, ATL-HNL and LAX-AMS/CDG. I do think they can bring down trip costs using the NEO out of LAX to TPAC. I think the TLV flight will stay on the 242T bird, as there really isn't a way to rotate a NEO in and out. Just look at what they have to do for BOM.

Wasn't LAX-HND on the 330 at some point?

If they do start to utilize the A339 on TPAC flights out of LAX (with the exception of the LAX-SYD route) like they’re doing in SEA, where would all the spare 777’s from LAX go? And to answer your question, yes it was. LAX-HND has bounced from 333 to 359 to 777 more times than I can count.


South America routes. I wouldn't be surprised to see JFK-GRU/GIG swap to the 777,
 
dstblj52
Posts: 142
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2019 8:38 pm

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Sun Jan 26, 2020 5:20 am

jbs2886 wrote:
hkcanadaexpat wrote:
There is more at play than simply swapping the longest 333 routes for 339s to save fuel. Bear in mind that the 339s have the Delta Suites products hence will most likely go on prestige routes where the premium seats are warranted at premium prices. Of course certain routes will use certain aircraft for purely/mostly technical reasons (LAX/JNB/BOM/NGO to name a few).

DL is currently building a widebody fleet that will have different products on similar sized aircraft.
1) <220 seats will see 76Zs (no Delta Suites) and 76Ts (with Delta Suites) [pending final decision on 76T fleet]
2) 230-240 seats will see 332s (no Delta Suites) and 764s (with Delta Suites)
[Obvious gap in the 250-270 seat segment]
3) 280-290 seats will see 339/777s (with Delta Suites) and 333s (no Delta Suites)
4) >300 seats will see 359s (with Delta Suites)

This will allow DL to segregate flights by premium demand and answer product specific competitor routes.
You can also foresee the future as the 76Zs get retired, the 332/333 will likely become the beach fleet.


Are they going to clearly designate the suites versus not? This seems contrary to the goal of running as consistent of a product as possible. Not that the old product is bad, but it certainly is inferior.

If you wanted to tell me where going to see a fleet become something like AF high density 777 which have very few premium seats that would make sense but for delta not to be the product consistency people would be a major change in strategy, will it happen mid refurbishment process yes but what you presented their looks a lot like the delta 2014 narrowbody fleet plan https://crankyflier.com/2014/01/09/delt ... duct-plan/.
 
1989worstyear
Posts: 768
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 6:53 pm

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Sun Jan 26, 2020 6:00 am

TW870 wrote:
panamair wrote:
FSDan wrote:

Aren't the Gulf Air 763s and the 76Ts one and the same? Any notes on the timeline for conversion/parking?


No, the GF 763s were converted to 76Zs when they installed the flat bed J seats- they are configured 26J/200Y and Y+. The GF ones are ships 1501-1506 and two of them have been retired already.

The 76Ts are the newest ones (ships 1607-1613) and have a pilot rest bunk and configured 36J/172Y and Y+.


Apparently according to the pilots, the 76Ts are/were going to have the rest bunks removed (because the A339 fleet is taking over the longest routes), and then the airplanes were going to be reconfigured with updated cabins (and I think fewer J seats). Now, given the expense of all that work, they are going to park the airplanes when they come up for HMVs. However, someone else on the forum I read speculated that they would actually park older birds coming up for HMVs, and then reconfigure the 76Ts, pulling out the crew bunks. The overall takeaway is that it is likely a wash as far as total operative 767 fleet size goes, as the Gulf Air birds are going to continue to fly as NFL charter planes rather than be parked, and then some other -300ERs that were scheduled for refurbishment are now going to be pulled from the fleet.


Seems like a waste if they did this to the 76T's while spending all that refurb. money on the much older members of the fleet. :irked:

Did the pilots say specifically it was the 76T' s being retired? The ex-Gulf ones must need quite a bit more work given their age.
Stuck at age 15 thanks to the certification date of the A320-200 and my parents' decision to postpone having a kid by 3 years. At least there's Dignitas...
 
NateGreat
Posts: 438
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2017 6:02 pm

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Sun Jan 26, 2020 6:10 am

777Mech wrote:
NateGreat wrote:
777Mech wrote:

The only routes that really need the 242T is JFK-TLV, ATL-HNL and LAX-AMS/CDG. I do think they can bring down trip costs using the NEO out of LAX to TPAC. I think the TLV flight will stay on the 242T bird, as there really isn't a way to rotate a NEO in and out. Just look at what they have to do for BOM.

Wasn't LAX-HND on the 330 at some point?

If they do start to utilize the A339 on TPAC flights out of LAX (with the exception of the LAX-SYD route) like they’re doing in SEA, where would all the spare 777’s from LAX go? And to answer your question, yes it was. LAX-HND has bounced from 333 to 359 to 777 more times than I can count.


South America routes. I wouldn't be surprised to see JFK-GRU/GIG swap to the 777,

So, you’re saying send more 777s through JFK? That would give JFK more routes with the Delta One Suites and Premium Select.
 
hkcanadaexpat
Posts: 4015
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 3:33 am

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Sun Jan 26, 2020 7:14 am

NateGreat wrote:
So, you’re saying send more 777s through JFK? That would give JFK more routes with the Delta One Suites and Premium Select.

Premium Select will be available on all aircraft once the refurbs are finished so that is a wash.
As for the Suites product, it will be offered on routes where there is a market willing to pay a premium for a premium product. No one here would be surprised to see JFK at the top of that list with TPAC a close second.
 
NateGreat
Posts: 438
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2017 6:02 pm

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Sun Jan 26, 2020 8:34 am

hkcanadaexpat wrote:
NateGreat wrote:
So, you’re saying send more 777s through JFK? That would give JFK more routes with the Delta One Suites and Premium Select.

Premium Select will be available on all aircraft once the refurbs are finished so that is a wash.
As for the Suites product, it will be offered on routes where there is a market willing to pay a premium for a premium product. No one here would be surprised to see JFK at the top of that list with TPAC a close second.

I mean, the only new Delta One products out of JFK are the Suites on the 777 to Mumbai, and the “semi-suites” on the 764 to London, Zurich, and future refurbed 764 routes.

I thought I heard that after SEA TPAC, SEA-AMS and MSP-ICN would be the next A339 routes. Would be intrigued to see SEA-CDG upgraded to the A339 as well, as many SEA 763ER routes are being/have been upgraded to the A339. MSP-ICN is currently operated by an A350, so would be interested to see where that A350 frequency would go if it switches to the A339.
 
hkcanadaexpat
Posts: 4015
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 3:33 am

Re: Delta Widebody Thread - 2020

Sun Jan 26, 2020 8:55 am

The next 2x 339s should basically be going on SEA-PEK (although it hasn't been loaded yet). The one after that is going on SEA-AMS during S20, switching to SEA-NRT in W20-21. A 4th 339 is due for delivery in June (probably July or August given supplier issuers). This one will likely act as a spare for the remainder of the S20 schedule.

Anything after that is speculation. No more routes have been loaded for W20-21 so far. And then there are 4 more 339s due for delivery (1 each month from Oct 2020). So you're looking at 5 additional frames available for route allocation during the first few months of 2021. These could go to the SEA TATL routes (2 frames needed in W20-21). Or the LAX TPAC/TATL routes (5 frames needed in W20-21). Or a mix and match.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos