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: 6571
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: 188
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: 849
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: 849
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: 4001
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

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