Any opinions as to the likelihood that Delta and United will retain these unique planes post COVID-19? I know that the 753s and 764s are not old, so hopefully they can stick around.

I had some travel booked on 753s for this summer and I'm not sure I'll be on 753s or even 752s.

In terms of your travel later this summer, nobody can tell you today with any degree of certainty what type of aircraft will be used to operate your upcoming flights. This was always something that was fluid, but even more so now with the unprecedented groundings and fleet reshuffling brought about by this crisis.

It would not surprise me at all for DL to retire all of the 753s, but I'd be shocked if they didn't retain the entire 764 fleet for at least several more years. That said, it's all going to come down to $$$ in the end.

DL just redid the interiors on the 764 fleet, so I doubt they would retire, but we are in uncharted territory.

DL747400 wrote:

In terms of your travel later this summer, nobody can tell you today with any degree of certainty what type of aircraft will be used to operate your upcoming flights. This was always something that was fluid, but even more so now with the unprecedented groundings and fleet reshuffling brought about by this crisis.

It would not surprise me at all for DL to retire all of the 753s, but I'd be shocked if they didn't retain the entire 764 fleet for at least several more years. That said, it's all going to come down to $$$ in the end.

What’s different between the 753s and 764s? Both are orphan fleets with CASM advantages. With cheap fuel, the 753 is likely the lowest CASM narrowbody in the fleet by a fair bit.

The UA 767-400ERs are their only fleet type that hasn't had the investment in the new Polaris interior. 777-200ERs are almost complete. 767-300ERs are almost complete.

IF UA wan't to reduce wide body capacity, 767-400ERs would be the most logical thing to cut, in addition to the 777-200As.

For travel later this year, all bets are off on the flights, frequencies, let alone fleet type. Your 753 could end up being an A319 for all practicality.

Beyond this, in all likelihood, DL will still be flying a portion of its 757 and 767 fleets, unless this thing goes into uncontrolled meltdown beyond the end of the year. If we start to see recovery, they will likely need the capacity of these in the out years, but the wildcard is going to be how does the delivery schedule get adjusted with Airbus.

Best case.....the 753s stay, the majority of 764s stay, 50% of 752s (primarily 75H, 75S) stay, 50% of 763s stay.
Worst case they are all gone

A lot of these frames were likely to stay in the fleet for another 5-7 years. Anything that was going to retire in the next 0-3 years is likely done.

Maybe Delta would be interested in UA's 764's? Assuming they could get them dirt cheap. They are of no use to anyone other than Delta. Would freight haulers be interested?

Gillbilly wrote:

Any opinions as to the likelihood that Delta and United will retain these unique planes post COVID-19? I know that the 753s and 764s are not old, so hopefully they can stick around.

I had some travel booked on 753s for this summer and I'm not sure I'll be on 753s or even 752s.

The 753 are unique in size, capacity e.g., they are really searched and have also a nice CASM. I expect to see them all again; there is just no 1 to 1 replacement for them available. This will be different for the 752, some will not come back.
If someone will get a chance to fly with them in summer; this is another story.

The overall wb demand globally will be low in next years and will slower recover than the demand for nb and there will stay a high demand of long range nb (A321 LR and XLR as example), who will replace some wb. The number of wb in the Delta and United fleets will be reduced. These will kick some of the A332, A333, 772 and 763 for Delta and 763, the 772, 772/773ER for United.

764; for Delta, I see them all flying again (as they are young and recently upgraded) but the 764 will additional replace some of the 763; more than already scheduled of the 763 will retire.
For United; I believe the same. the 764 will come back, but for them, some of the 763ER, which have been not upgraded, will stay additional parked in the desert.

T4thH wrote:

Gillbilly wrote:

Any opinions as to the likelihood that Delta and United will retain these unique planes post COVID-19? I know that the 753s and 764s are not old, so hopefully they can stick around.

I had some travel booked on 753s for this summer and I'm not sure I'll be on 753s or even 752s.

The 753 are unique in size, capacity e.g., they are really searched and have also a nice CASM. I expect to see them all again; there is just no 1 to 1 replacement for them available. This will be different for the 752, some will not come back.
If someone will get a chance to fly with them in summer; this is another story.

The overall wb demand globally will be low in next years and will slower recover than the demand for nb and there will stay a high demand of long range nb (A321 LR and XLR as example), who will replace some wb. The number of wb in the Delta and United fleets will be reduced. These will kick some of the A332, A333, 772 and 763 for Delta and 763, the 772, 772/773ER for United.

764; for Delta, I see them all flying again (as they are young and recently upgraded) but the 764 will additional replace some of the 763; more than already scheduled of the 763 will retire.
For United; I believe the same. the 764 will come back, but for them, some of the 763ER, which have been not upgraded, will stay additional parked in the desert.

The 764 at UA is the only widebody fleet to not have even undergone the supplemental type certificate to install the Polaris seats and Premium Plus. The 777-200ERs and 767-300s are almost done with the retrofits, so if any cuts are to be made I would expect the 764 to be cut simply because it does not need to be retrofitted.

global1 wrote:

Maybe Delta would be interested in UA's 764's? Assuming they could get them dirt cheap. They are of no use to anyone other than Delta. Would freight haulers be interested?

I suppose DL could replace its oldest 763s - to the extent it needs intercon capacity - with UA 764s. What kind of transaction price would be necessary vs. the many A330Neos on order would be an interesting study. IMHO every DL widebody delivery that can be deferred without significant penalty for the next 24 months will be deferred.

I don't see the existence of few 753/764 as being the problem; that's always been the condition. Eliminating either doesn't eliminate a pilot work group unless you retire all the 752 or 763 at the same time - which is close to crazy talk. (AA's example isn't instructive: AA is farther along with 757/763 fleet replacement.) The question is the utility of 753/764 to specific needs of DL and UA.

global1 wrote:

Maybe Delta would be interested in UA's 764's? Assuming they could get them dirt cheap. They are of no use to anyone other than Delta. Would freight haulers be interested?

Great airplanes but no STC for use as a freighter plus a 14 ft longer wingspan so probably not as freight haulers with the integrators but perhaps Amazon or foreign interests.

global1 wrote:

Maybe Delta would be interested in UA's 764's? Assuming they could get them dirt cheap. They are of no use to anyone other than Delta. Would freight haulers be interested?

the United 764 won't be sold and certainly not to Delta. If anything? they'd be converted to freighters then sold.

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

For travel later this year, all bets are off on the flights, frequencies, let alone fleet type. Your 753 could end up being an A319 for all practicality.

Beyond this, in all likelihood, DL will still be flying a portion of its 757 and 767 fleets, unless this thing goes into uncontrolled meltdown beyond the end of the year. If we start to see recovery, they will likely need the capacity of these in the out years, but the wildcard is going to be how does the delivery schedule get adjusted with Airbus.

Best case.....the 753s stay, the majority of 764s stay, 50% of 752s (primarily 75H, 75S) stay, 50% of 763s stay.
Worst case they are all gone

A lot of these frames were likely to stay in the fleet for another 5-7 years. Anything that was going to retire in the next 0-3 years is likely done.

I think your best case is somewhat extreme. In the short term, DL will retire the MD-88/90 and select 320, 757 and 763. The pool of 320 will be the 35 aircraft delivered between 1990-93 (these are what remain of the 50 originally delivered to NW), the 24 non-NBA 757 delivered to DL between 1990-93 and the 15 B757 delivered to NW in 95-96 (which received largely recycled interiors during refurbishment). The pool of 763 will include the 17 oldest aircraft delivered 1990-93 and perhaps 5 others delivered 95-96. In the near term, I'd expect that the two-thirds of the 717 whose lease matures in the next four years to be returned to Boeing, and 321 NEO deliveries to replace the ex-TW B757 aircraft (which feature a different physical configuration), as opposed to those aircraft being reconfigured into the pure domestic fleet. If things continue to be miserable, I'd expect additional 757 and 763 to be pulled, as well as select 319. IMO, the late 1990s/early 2000 A320, all of the B738 and the B764 are "safe." I wouldn't be surprised to see nearly the entire 763 fleet retired before a single 764 left. There's also pilot chatter that the 777 fleet could go/shrink.

Opps, I fogot, this is a.net. The 717 scope means DL will retire the 739, 321, 330 and 359 fleet and keep the 717 for a million years because the pilots run the company.

strfyr51 wrote:

the United 764 won't be sold and certainly not to Delta. If anything? they'd be converted to freighters then sold.

Uh, UA isn't going to spend $$$ converting the 764 to freighters, then shop them around, to prevent DL from getting them. UA would probably love for DL to be the highest bidder... DL operates ancient 764, UA 787. In their eyes, they'd be winners.

The entire 764 fleet are great candidates for freighter conversion. Boeing has already studied the idea.

Cubsrule wrote:

With cheap fuel, the 753 is likely the lowest CASM narrowbody in the fleet by a fair bit.

Which doesn't help at all in the short term with load factors in the toilet. In the medium term, hopefully DL still sees a use for them on trunk domestic routes once demand starts to pick back up.

KFTG wrote:

The entire 764 fleet are great candidates for freighter conversion. Boeing has already studied the idea.

I doubt there's any variant that Boeing hasn't studied as such.

The question is: who'd pay for a conversion program for such a small number of aircraft, the majority of which are nearly 20yrs-old and heavily used.

Jeff Bezos would.

KFTG wrote:

Jeff Bezos would.

Or more realistically, Amazon would simply place a large enough order for new units, considering the identical certification costs. And most likely, larger order for 763Fs.

Back to Square One for existing 764s. . .

FSDan wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

With cheap fuel, the 753 is likely the lowest CASM narrowbody in the fleet by a fair bit.

Which doesn't help at all in the short term with load factors in the toilet. In the medium term, hopefully DL still sees a use for them on trunk domestic routes once demand starts to pick back up.

While we don’t yet have data on route-specific load factors during the pandemic, it sounds like the trunk routes are the ones that actually have decent loads.

In think the 764s will stay, and the fact they haven't gotten the new Polaris Interiors will not matter. I think the 764s will replace the 77A's, Guam, Hawaii, inter-hub etc..

MIflyer12 wrote:

Eliminating either doesn't eliminate a pilot work group unless you retire all the 752 or 763 at the same time - which is close to crazy talk. (AA's example isn't instructive: AA is farther along with 757/763 fleet replacement.) The question is the utility of 753/764 to specific needs of DL and UA.

They could change it, but DL has a dedicated pilot group for the 764.

WidebodyPTV wrote:

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

For travel later this year, all bets are off on the flights, frequencies, let alone fleet type. Your 753 could end up being an A319 for all practicality.

Beyond this, in all likelihood, DL will still be flying a portion of its 757 and 767 fleets, unless this thing goes into uncontrolled meltdown beyond the end of the year. If we start to see recovery, they will likely need the capacity of these in the out years, but the wildcard is going to be how does the delivery schedule get adjusted with Airbus.

Best case.....the 753s stay, the majority of 764s stay, 50% of 752s (primarily 75H, 75S) stay, 50% of 763s stay.
Worst case they are all gone

A lot of these frames were likely to stay in the fleet for another 5-7 years. Anything that was going to retire in the next 0-3 years is likely done.

I think your best case is somewhat extreme. In the short term, DL will retire the MD-88/90 and select 320, 757 and 763. The pool of 320 will be the 35 aircraft delivered between 1990-93 (these are what remain of the 50 originally delivered to NW), the 24 non-NBA 757 delivered to DL between 1990-93 and the 15 B757 delivered to NW in 95-96 (which received largely recycled interiors during refurbishment). The pool of 763 will include the 17 oldest aircraft delivered 1990-93 and perhaps 5 others delivered 95-96. In the near term, I'd expect that the two-thirds of the 717 whose lease matures in the next four years to be returned to Boeing, and 321 NEO deliveries to replace the ex-TW B757 aircraft (which feature a different physical configuration), as opposed to those aircraft being reconfigured into the pure domestic fleet. If things continue to be miserable, I'd expect additional 757 and 763 to be pulled, as well as select 319. IMO, the late 1990s/early 2000 A320, all of the B738 and the B764 are "safe." I wouldn't be surprised to see nearly the entire 763 fleet retired before a single 764 left. There's also pilot chatter that the 777 fleet could go/shrink.

Opps, I fogot, this is a.net. The 717 scope means DL will retire the 739, 321, 330 and 359 fleet and keep the 717 for a million years because the pilots run the company.

strfyr51 wrote:

the United 764 won't be sold and certainly not to Delta. If anything? they'd be converted to freighters then sold.

Uh, UA isn't going to spend $$$ converting the 764 to freighters, then shop them around, to prevent DL from getting them. UA would probably love for DL to be the highest bidder... DL operates ancient 764, UA 787. In their eyes, they'd be winners.

Yeah...for the purpose of this thread I was really only talking about impacted retirements to the 757 & 767 fleets. The conversation around 753 and 764 is tied to the broader fleet plans of the totality of the 757 and 767 fleets and all sub-types.

Here's the situation we are likely facing:

Wide-body:
A359 - all to eventually return to service
A339 - all to eventually return to service
A333 - all to eventually return to service, but some may be in storage for several years
A332 - all to eventually return to service
B77L - all to eventually return to service
B77E - all to eventually return to service
B764 - mod'd aircraft to all eventually return to service; the unmod'd aircraft may be dependent if DL has already paid for the mods/seats, if not they these in theory may not be
B763 - at least 50% of this fleet is probably not going to return to service

Large Narrow-body:
B753 - all likely to eventually return to service
B752 - at least 50% of this fleet is probably not going to return to service
B739 - all to eventually return to service
A321 - all to eventually return to service

Medium Narrow-body:
MD90 - done June 2020
MD88 - done June 2020
A320 - at least 50% of this fleet is probably going to retire early
B738 - most are likely to return to service, but some may be in storage for several years

Small Narrow-body:
B73G - all to eventually return to service, quickly
A319 - most to eventually return to service, some may retire early
B717 - 30%-100% of the fleet may retire. 30% are probably to remained parked indefinitely, the balance fleet is at the whims of the Boeing rumors
A220 - all to eventually return to service, quickly


Reductions:
41 MD88
30 MD90
---
71 confirmed:

High Probability, Early retirements:
20-30 B763
20-40 B752
20-30 A320
30-91 B717
---
90 - 191 additional
---
Net:
161- 262 aircraft

LAX772LR wrote:

KFTG wrote:

The entire 764 fleet are great candidates for freighter conversion. Boeing has already studied the idea.

I doubt there's any variant that Boeing hasn't studied as such.

The question is: who'd pay for a conversion program for such a small number of aircraft, the majority of which are nearly 20yrs-old and heavily used.

I don't think age and use have much to do with it anymore. CAM has converted 763s with well over 100,000 hours on them already and age-wise they are operating line number 17.

bfitzflyer wrote:

DL just redid the interiors on the 764 fleet, so I doubt they would retire, but we are in uncharted territory.

Not all of them. They started refurbishments. UA has not upgraded a single 764 to the updated Polaris and Premium Plus cabins.

Going by the stats in the DL aircraft refurbishment thread for the 764 fleet:

10 mods complete
4 were in progress
7 not started

It's possible the virus is a blessing and a curse for airlines. One you get to shed a good number of older aircraft. Almost all carriers have a good number of newer aircraft on order. 737MAX's, A220's, A320 NEO family, 787's, A350's. This is a great time for airlines to get younger fleets and shed there old aircraft fast. Not to mention possibly shedding routes that were not that profitable. Coming at the price of employees and losing money right now.

UWPAviation wrote:

It's possible the virus is a blessing and a curse for airlines. One you get to shed a good number of older aircraft. Almost all carriers have a good number of newer aircraft on order. 737MAX's, A220's, A320 NEO family, 787's, A350's. This is a great time for airlines to get younger fleets and shed there old aircraft fast. Not to mention possibly shedding routes that were not that profitable. Coming at the price of employees and losing money right now.

I'm sure many of the airlines would rather shed their purchase obligations and keep their old aircraft. They're paid off frames and variable costs fuel costs are low. Why would I want expensive capital payments in an era of low demand? Maintenance may be expensive, but it is primarily variable and ramps up/down with demand.

With big enough contractual teeth, airlines will retire their old planes because the immediate cash penalties of terminating purchase agreements can be large. But I can guarantee you that if the airlines could snap their fingers and get out of their new aircraft purchases, those would be cut first (at least in the short term).

Some airlines may want to ditch sub-types of aircraft they have to reduce mx costs, cockpit staffing, oldest in the fleet, the accountants can write them down, have little further depreciation value. Then there is planned deliveries, perhaps deferred, of 787's and other models that will replace some 767's.

ltbewr wrote:

Some airlines may want to ditch sub-types of aircraft they have to reduce mx costs, cockpit staffing, oldest in the fleet, the accountants can write them down, have little further depreciation value. Then there is planned deliveries, perhaps deferred, of 787's and other models that will replace some 767's.

Depreciation and write-downs are non-cash exercises and - therefore - completely irrelevant in a world where cash and liquidity is king above all else.

Deliveries are net new cash commitments and will be avoided at all practical costs. Lots of negotiations are going on to defer, cancel, defer, cancel, cancel, and defer near-term deliveries even it it means paying more further down the road or paying a small penalty today.

For UA, it's either ditch 16x 2000-2001 764's not refurbished or ditch 1998-2001 x 763's fully refurbished. While one may be more efficient (764), the other requires no additional capital (763) unless it's either 1) already ordered or 2) can be easily swapped from 763 to 764 with nominal costs.

I am assuming there is no rush for either carrier to rid the 767's if they do not want to with many parts still available with retired frames and freighters in production?

Most of them are relatively 2 decades old, which could be a good time to retire the 753 and the 764 (Both of whom operated by DL and UA, but replacement is their discretion). It's potential replacement could be the A330-900neo, 787-9, 787-8, 797 (if developed), or A321neo.

Here's the challenges that the airlines face, and its a lot different right now than in a traditional more stable environment.

Storing aircraft costs money
Maintaining aircraft costs money
Paying for new aircraft costs money

Every airline has far more existing aircraft that they ever could need at least until Summer 2022, best case, realistically maybe not until Summer 2024 or 2025.
Airlines have firm deliveries that in reality that have zero need to accept at least for the next 2-4 years.
They have to balance negotiating a a revised and slowed delivery schedule with the OEMs.
They have to balance which aircraft that may need to reactive later in 2020, for Summer 2021, and for Summer 2022
They have to balance near/medium term maintenance requirements of each aircraft - e.g., what older aircraft are approaching an HMV that we should fly in the near-term and then just retire? What newer aircraft should we keep parked in long-term storage for1-2 years that are approaching an HMV?

Its a complicated scenario and right now there is really no good forecast data to go off of as there is no clear demand forecast of what the next 1-3-6-12-24 months look like. The cone of uncertainty is extremely wide right now and everyone wants to conserve cash and stay alive in the short-term, they need to eventually plan for a recovery.

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

Here's the challenges that the airlines face, and its a lot different right now than in a traditional more stable environment.

Storing aircraft costs money
Maintaining aircraft costs money
Paying for new aircraft costs money

Every airline has far more existing aircraft that they ever could need at least until Summer 2022, best case, realistically maybe not until Summer 2024 or 2025.
Airlines have firm deliveries that in reality that have zero need to accept at least for the next 2-4 years.
They have to balance negotiating a a revised and slowed delivery schedule with the OEMs.
They have to balance which aircraft that may need to reactive later in 2020, for Summer 2021, and for Summer 2022
They have to balance near/medium term maintenance requirements of each aircraft - e.g., what older aircraft are approaching an HMV that we should fly in the near-term and then just retire? What newer aircraft should we keep parked in long-term storage for1-2 years that are approaching an HMV?

Its a complicated scenario and right now there is really no good forecast data to go off of as there is no clear demand forecast of what the next 1-3-6-12-24 months look like. The cone of uncertainty is extremely wide right now and everyone wants to conserve cash and stay alive in the short-term, they need to eventually plan for a recovery.

Yes, the only guarantee is that airlines will do everything in their power to avoid new deliveries / capital commitments and that airframes that were planned to be retired in the next 2-3 years anyways will get accelerated retirement as soon as they hit up against a B/C check. Everything else is a guessing game about what frames they decide to keep, store, or retire.

WidebodyPTV wrote:

In the near term, I'd expect that the two-thirds of the 717 whose lease matures in the next four years to be returned to Boeing, and 321 NEO deliveries to replace the ex-TW B757 aircraft (which feature a different physical configuration), as opposed to those aircraft being reconfigured into the pure domestic fleet.

Well, DL also owns several other 757s also similar to TWA's configuration. Off the top of my head the ex-Shanghai ones which were the last off the line (including N823DX, the last 757 produced).

Spacepope wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

KFTG wrote:

The entire 764 fleet are great candidates for freighter conversion. Boeing has already studied the idea.

I doubt there's any variant that Boeing hasn't studied as such.

The question is: who'd pay for a conversion program for such a small number of aircraft, the majority of which are nearly 20yrs-old and heavily used.

I don't think age and use have much to do with it anymore. CAM has converted 763s with well over 100,000 hours on them already and age-wise they are operating line number 17.

Age per se was never the issue; it's more mtx (longterm and near)... with the 764ER having unique parts/mtx relative to the worldwide fleet of 767s, it's possible (if not likely) that costs may be untenable relative to other options.

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

Yeah...for the purpose of this thread I was really only talking about impacted retirements to the 757 & 767 fleets. The conversation around 753 and 764 is tied to the broader fleet plans of the totality of the 757 and 767 fleets and all sub-types.

Here's the situation we are likely facing:

Wide-body:
A359 - all to eventually return to service
A339 - all to eventually return to service
A333 - all to eventually return to service, but some may be in storage for several years
A332 - all to eventually return to service
B77L - all to eventually return to service
B77E - all to eventually return to service
B764 - mod'd aircraft to all eventually return to service; the unmod'd aircraft may be dependent if DL has already paid for the mods/seats, if not they these in theory may not be
B763 - at least 50% of this fleet is probably not going to return to service

Large Narrow-body:
B753 - all likely to eventually return to service
B752 - at least 50% of this fleet is probably not going to return to service
B739 - all to eventually return to service
A321 - all to eventually return to service

Medium Narrow-body:
MD90 - done June 2020
MD88 - done June 2020
A320 - at least 50% of this fleet is probably going to retire early
B738 - most are likely to return to service, but some may be in storage for several years

Small Narrow-body:
B73G - all to eventually return to service, quickly
A319 - most to eventually return to service, some may retire early
B717 - 30%-100% of the fleet may retire. 30% are probably to remained parked indefinitely, the balance fleet is at the whims of the Boeing rumors
A220 - all to eventually return to service, quickly


Reductions:
41 MD88
30 MD90
---
71 confirmed:

High Probability, Early retirements:
20-30 B763
20-40 B752
20-30 A320
30-91 B717
---
90 - 191 additional
---
Net:
161- 262 aircraft

DL had 64 A220 and 127 A321 scheduled for delivery through 2025. After DL announced that the 717 would be retained through the end of the decade, it became logical that there was likely to be a dramatic draw down in the 757 fleet, given the amount of the capacity coming into the system vs. projected growth (I know, I know, this is a.net, and all that excess capacity was to build a hub that would exceed ATL in capacity and movements at Mitt Romeny International at SLC). Ultimately, I think many of these aircraft will get a reprieve. Among the narrowbody fleet, we know that the MD-88 and MD-90 will be gone soon, and it's probable that numerous A320 and B757 built between 1990-1993 will as well. But I wouldn't be surprised to see some of the "younger" fleet parked, while older A320 and B757 are flown, to extend the life of the younger aircraft. Many of the 757 that would've been retired around 25 (by the 220/321 order) .... may now be around to see 30. Especially if DL opts to return the 717 coming off lease.

Among the widebody fleet, the industry trend has been to replace 767-sized aircraft with larger ones, and DL hasn't been an exception. Of course, twenty years ago, DL envisioned that the 777 would operate most of its long-haul flying for the next generation but instead, numerous 763 and the entire 764 fleet that were already on property for domestic services substituted. While a.net insists that because DL operates so many 767, it must be the right aircraft for them, and therefore DL will insist on the 767NG or 797... the evidence shows the contrary: 58 current orders for aircraft around 300 seats, mostly to replace the smaller 763. And, of course, 764/330 have replaced the lion's share of 763 flying at ATL and JFK. Ultimately, the 763 is just too small an aircraft for long-haul and I'd expect the entire fleet to go before a single 764 was retired. I could be wrong, of course.

LAX772LR wrote:

Spacepope wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

I doubt there's any variant that Boeing hasn't studied as such.

The question is: who'd pay for a conversion program for such a small number of aircraft, the majority of which are nearly 20yrs-old and heavily used.

I don't think age and use have much to do with it anymore. CAM has converted 763s with well over 100,000 hours on them already and age-wise they are operating line number 17.

Age per se was never the issue; it's more mtx (longterm and near)... with the 764ER having unique parts/mtx relative to the worldwide fleet of 767s, it's possible (if not likely) that costs may be untenable relative to other options.

Bingo. On the surface it would make a great freighter the reality the clock is ticking on that unique landing gear... gonna be pretty tough to source those parts for a small orphan fleet

KFTG wrote:

Jeff Bezos would.

He'd have to buy a simulator and insure all those 763 guys have qualifications and currency on both display types.

The options for 764s are as follows:
1. DL buys them from UA
2. UA buys them from DL
3. Some get scrapped, some become VIP
4. All get scrapped

You think Bezos can’t afford “the simulator”? There are actually 3 767-400 simulators in existence, 2x at UA (1 is ex-CO, the other ex-Boeing) and 1x at DL. Having “currency on both types” is just a matter of designing the training program around just that, which is exactly what UA does (the “756” fleet includes the 752, 753, 763, 764).

Regarding the landing gear, it shares quite a few parts with the 777. Atlas is now a 777 operator, as is FedEx (who might also be interested). This issue is overstated. Even if you buy the whole 764 fleet from both carriers, a handful of jets could be used for parts only. FedEx has done just this multiple times (how long did the ex-UA DC10 freighter sit in the desert until being scrapped?).

KFTG wrote:

You think Bezos can’t afford “the simulator”? There are actually 3 767-400 simulators in existence, 2x at UA (1 is ex-CO, the other ex-Boeing) and 1x at DL. Having “currency on both types” is just a matter of designing the training program around just that, which is exactly what UA does (the “756” fleet includes the 752, 753, 763, 764).

Regarding the landing gear, it shares quite a few parts with the 777. Atlas is now a 777 operator, as is FedEx (who might also be interested). This issue is overstated. Even if you buy the whole 764 fleet from both carriers, a handful of jets could be used for parts only. FedEx has done just this multiple times (how long did the ex-UA DC10 freighter sit in the desert until being scrapped?).

That's not the problem what is the problem is that 764 has a 14 foot greater wingspan than the 763, which means you need larger spots which creates issues especially around densely packed airports for both FedEx and UPS and if you're going to create bigger parking spots you might as well just go for used A330 or 777 which are far more plentiful and also very cheap. Cargo airlines tend to pick aircraft that are cheap available in large quantities and then tend to pick fairly similar subtypes and options sets.

dstblj52 wrote:

KFTG wrote:

You think Bezos can’t afford “the simulator”? There are actually 3 767-400 simulators in existence, 2x at UA (1 is ex-CO, the other ex-Boeing) and 1x at DL. Having “currency on both types” is just a matter of designing the training program around just that, which is exactly what UA does (the “756” fleet includes the 752, 753, 763, 764).

Regarding the landing gear, it shares quite a few parts with the 777. Atlas is now a 777 operator, as is FedEx (who might also be interested). This issue is overstated. Even if you buy the whole 764 fleet from both carriers, a handful of jets could be used for parts only. FedEx has done just this multiple times (how long did the ex-UA DC10 freighter sit in the desert until being scrapped?).

That's not the problem what is the problem is that 764 has a 14 foot greater wingspan than the 763, which means you need larger spots which creates issues especially around densely packed airports for both FedEx and UPS and if you're going to create bigger parking spots you might as well just go for used A330 or 777 which are far more plentiful and also very cheap. Cargo airlines tend to pick aircraft that are cheap available in large quantities and then tend to pick fairly similar subtypes and options sets.

The 764 is still a Group IV aircraft; it was DL who requested the 764 to fit in existing Group IV gates used by the L-1011. A330 and 777 are Group V.

1337Delta764 wrote:

dstblj52 wrote:

KFTG wrote:

You think Bezos can’t afford “the simulator”? There are actually 3 767-400 simulators in existence, 2x at UA (1 is ex-CO, the other ex-Boeing) and 1x at DL. Having “currency on both types” is just a matter of designing the training program around just that, which is exactly what UA does (the “756” fleet includes the 752, 753, 763, 764).

Regarding the landing gear, it shares quite a few parts with the 777. Atlas is now a 777 operator, as is FedEx (who might also be interested). This issue is overstated. Even if you buy the whole 764 fleet from both carriers, a handful of jets could be used for parts only. FedEx has done just this multiple times (how long did the ex-UA DC10 freighter sit in the desert until being scrapped?).

That's not the problem what is the problem is that 764 has a 14 foot greater wingspan than the 763, which means you need larger spots which creates issues especially around densely packed airports for both FedEx and UPS and if you're going to create bigger parking spots you might as well just go for used A330 or 777 which are far more plentiful and also very cheap. Cargo airlines tend to pick aircraft that are cheap available in large quantities and then tend to pick fairly similar subtypes and options sets.

The 764 is still a Group IV aircraft; it was DL who requested the 764 to fit in existing Group IV gates used by the L-1011. A330 and 777 are Group V.

Its still a group 4 aircraft but most exclusive cargo terminals operated by people like ups and FedEx don't follow traditional gate sizing because why waste space when you A are not building traditional gates, and B have built a facility exclusively for your own use and control your own fleet.

I think the 764 is done at UA. Can have its roles filled by the 763 and 788. No need to spend money to outfit them with Polaris seats

If the 764s are retired, is there any possibilities they are converted to freighters? I know there is no program to convert 764 now, but they seem to be ideal for US domestic freight with added capacity. May be ideal for Amazon Air.

If the airlines have to block out seats for any meaningful amount of time because of COVID wouldn’t that make widebodies more efficient?

UA444 wrote:

I think the 764 is done at UA. Can have its roles filled by the 763 and 788. No need to spend money to outfit them with Polaris seats

Ehh maybe. I can honestly see the older 777A's bring done and the 764 slide into that role.

OneSexyL1011 wrote:

UA444 wrote:

I think the 764 is done at UA. Can have its roles filled by the 763 and 788. No need to spend money to outfit them with Polaris seats

Ehh maybe. I can honestly see the older 777A's bring done and the 764 slide into that role.

The 777A’s took over many of the 764 routes post merger. Especially the Guam and some Hawaii flights out of IAH.

They’re still flying the 777A’s, but all the 764s are stored.

dstblj52 wrote:

1337Delta764 wrote:

dstblj52 wrote:

That's not the problem what is the problem is that 764 has a 14 foot greater wingspan than the 763, which means you need larger spots which creates issues especially around densely packed airports for both FedEx and UPS and if you're going to create bigger parking spots you might as well just go for used A330 or 777 which are far more plentiful and also very cheap. Cargo airlines tend to pick aircraft that are cheap available in large quantities and then tend to pick fairly similar subtypes and options sets.

The 764 is still a Group IV aircraft; it was DL who requested the 764 to fit in existing Group IV gates used by the L-1011. A330 and 777 are Group V.

Its still a group 4 aircraft but most exclusive cargo terminals operated by people like ups and FedEx don't follow traditional gate sizing because why waste space when you A are not building traditional gates, and B have built a facility exclusively for your own use and control your own fleet.

The MD-11 shares the same wingspan and has been operated by both FedEx and UPS for some time. There should be plenty of existing stands at their exclusive facilities where those aircraft could be appropriately parked. With that in consideration and with only 37 active examples of the B764, the stand width issue is likely not as bad as it seems.

I hope the 764 survives for years to come at UA along with it's smaller sister the 763. I cannot speak to DL, as living in Colorado, UA just made since when I first started flying around the globe for business. I have been flying to Europe twice a month for years now and the rule was any flight segment over 10 hours we could fly business and anything less was economy. The 777 was great when it was 9 across, but is a cattle car now at 10 across. The 787 was a cattle car the day United started flying it. It was after all I believe United that started the trend to go 9 across in economy. The aisles are too narrow and the seats are way uncomfortable for 8+ hour trips. The 767 on the other way is a pleasure to fly in both coach and Polaris. You are never more than 1 seat from the aisle in economy and the center seats in Polaris are single on the 764 and all aisle access on the 763 now. I sure hope that long term both versions of the 767 survive at UA.