Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

  • 1
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 15
 
User avatar
MrHMSH
Posts: 2610
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 7:32 pm

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 1:02 pm

jayunited wrote:
ILikeTrains wrote:
How much cargo was Delta carrying on LAX-SYD or JNB-ATL?



I'm not sure about JNB-ATL but UA on LAX-SYD on a 789 can carry a full load of passengers which equates to around 300 bags and around 20,000-25,000 pounds of cargo, the same is true on return leg . The only time the 789 has problems coming out of SYD in during the summer when temperatures exceed 100 degrees F or 38 degrees C. Under those conditions UA on a 789 would have to jettison all the cargo out of SYD.

I've always thought the A359 was much more capable than the 789, so I've never understood why DL did not place the A359 on this route. Now in a memo posted they are saying the problem has been fixed, but what problem is DL referring to? Prior to COVID-19 SQ used a standard A359 on SIN-SFO-SIN, side note UA 789s SIN-SFO could carry a full passenger load and around 15,000 pounds of cargo. I wish someone could explain what the problem was DL faced with their A359s and how it was fixed.


It was said earlier on this forum that part of the problem was the diversion, the diversion was BNE which would have made life difficult for the A350, but now that CBR is possible the issue is resolved. Otherwise it could be that DL's birds are (were?) 268T. If DL went for the 275T version (or obviously the 280T) then there's no issue, the A359 should carry more payload both ways SYD-LAX.

Why weren't A359s used to SYD before? If you have them you have to fly the 77Ls somewhere, so might as well be on a route where you can use its enormous payload potential.
 
DiamondFlyer
Posts: 3352
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 11:50 pm

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 1:03 pm

MrHMSH wrote:
jayunited wrote:
ILikeTrains wrote:
How much cargo was Delta carrying on LAX-SYD or JNB-ATL?



I'm not sure about JNB-ATL but UA on LAX-SYD on a 789 can carry a full load of passengers which equates to around 300 bags and around 20,000-25,000 pounds of cargo, the same is true on return leg . The only time the 789 has problems coming out of SYD in during the summer when temperatures exceed 100 degrees F or 38 degrees C. Under those conditions UA on a 789 would have to jettison all the cargo out of SYD.

I've always thought the A359 was much more capable than the 789, so I've never understood why DL did not place the A359 on this route. Now in a memo posted they are saying the problem has been fixed, but what problem is DL referring to? Prior to COVID-19 SQ used a standard A359 on SIN-SFO-SIN, side note UA 789s SIN-SFO could carry a full passenger load and around 15,000 pounds of cargo. I wish someone could explain what the problem was DL faced with their A359s and how it was fixed.


It was said earlier on this forum that part of the problem was the diversion, the diversion was BNE which would have made life difficult for the A350, but now that CBR is possible the issue is resolved. Otherwise it could be that DL's birds are (were?) 268T. If DL went for the 275T version (or obviously the 280T) then there's no issue, the A359 should carry more payload both ways SYD-LAX.

Why weren't A359s used to SYD before? If you have them you have to fly the 77Ls somewhere, so might as well be on a route where you can use its enormous payload potential.


What weight are the LATAM birds they are getting? Perhaps that solves it some.
From my cold, dead hands
 
xwb565
Posts: 159
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2018 1:01 pm

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 1:14 pm

jayunited wrote:
ILikeTrains wrote:
How much cargo was Delta carrying on LAX-SYD or JNB-ATL?



I'm not sure about JNB-ATL but UA on LAX-SYD on a 789 can carry a full load of passengers which equates to around 300 bags and around 20,000-25,000 pounds of cargo, the same is true on return leg . The only time the 789 has problems coming out of SYD in during the summer when temperatures exceed 100 degrees F or 38 degrees C. Under those conditions UA on a 789 would have to jettison all the cargo out of SYD.

I've always thought the A359 was much more capable than the 789, so I've never understood why DL did not place the A359 on this route. Now in a memo posted they are saying the problem has been fixed, but what problem is DL referring to? Prior to COVID-19 SQ used a standard A359 on SIN-SFO-SIN, side note UA 789s SIN-SFO could carry a full passenger load and around 15,000 pounds of cargo. I wish someone could explain what the problem was DL faced with their A359s and how it was fixed.


There was never any problem. All of Delta's a350s are 606k lbs mtow at minimum. The last four delivered are at 617k. Even the lighter ones would lift more than a 789 on Lax-Syd. The newer 350s operate 17 hour sectors with 35t payloads for other operators. The memo mentions the enhancements allow the aircraft to operate at a lower cost than the 777. This simply means the 77l was lifting a substantial enough cargo load over the 606k a350s on the Lax-Syd to overcome any fuel burn advantage. The 617k birds not only offer a higher mtow but they are also lighter and burn less fuel. This in the covid scenario has probably tipped the cost advantage back to a350.
Last edited by xwb565 on Fri May 15, 2020 1:26 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 
reltney
Posts: 615
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2004 1:34 am

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 1:15 pm

nicode wrote:
So DL will have an only Airbuses widebodies fleet.


The 767 is a wide body... Delta is flying the 767 so your answer is no. They are trimming the fleet a bit but still in there kicking.

As for the Airbus only....not hardly. The 757 should last thru 2026 at current numbers or until a replacement can be built. The fluf/737 will be around 20 more years No the 321 neo can’t quite do what the 757 can according to the numbers Airbus and Delta. ..Boeing announcement next week...

ER means only “extended range”. In weird Delta only language it is what they call the 767-300ER as at one time it was a separate international fleet. Funny thing is I actually had a old grumpy F/O who was way senior to me as a capt and he had no idea and thought the ER was the type of plane he flew. When asked by London Director at check in he said “ER”. I never let him live that down.

Times are strange and are changing....

Cheers
Knives don't kill people. People with knives kill people.
OUTLAW KNIVES.

I am a pilot, therefore I envy no one...
 
User avatar
MrHMSH
Posts: 2610
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 7:32 pm

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 1:39 pm

DiamondFlyer wrote:
MrHMSH wrote:
jayunited wrote:


I'm not sure about JNB-ATL but UA on LAX-SYD on a 789 can carry a full load of passengers which equates to around 300 bags and around 20,000-25,000 pounds of cargo, the same is true on return leg . The only time the 789 has problems coming out of SYD in during the summer when temperatures exceed 100 degrees F or 38 degrees C. Under those conditions UA on a 789 would have to jettison all the cargo out of SYD.

I've always thought the A359 was much more capable than the 789, so I've never understood why DL did not place the A359 on this route. Now in a memo posted they are saying the problem has been fixed, but what problem is DL referring to? Prior to COVID-19 SQ used a standard A359 on SIN-SFO-SIN, side note UA 789s SIN-SFO could carry a full passenger load and around 15,000 pounds of cargo. I wish someone could explain what the problem was DL faced with their A359s and how it was fixed.


It was said earlier on this forum that part of the problem was the diversion, the diversion was BNE which would have made life difficult for the A350, but now that CBR is possible the issue is resolved. Otherwise it could be that DL's birds are (were?) 268T. If DL went for the 275T version (or obviously the 280T) then there's no issue, the A359 should carry more payload both ways SYD-LAX.

Why weren't A359s used to SYD before? If you have them you have to fly the 77Ls somewhere, so might as well be on a route where you can use its enormous payload potential.


What weight are the LATAM birds they are getting? Perhaps that solves it some.


Not sure! I know DL are taking over some orders from LATAM, but I don't know if they're taking existing ones or ones that are yet to be built. A359s delivered now have the wing twist and new sharklet, so they are capable of being 280T out of the box. I would speculate that DL's future deliveries will have this option implemented so it's the closest it can be to a 77L replacement.
 
xwb565
Posts: 159
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2018 1:01 pm

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 1:42 pm

MrHMSH wrote:

Not sure! I know DL are taking over some orders from LATAM, but I don't know if they're taking existing ones or ones that are yet to be built. A359s delivered now have the wing twist and new sharklet, so they are capable of being 280T out of the box. I would speculate that DL's future deliveries will have this option implemented so it's the closest it can be to a 77L replacement.


They have already have four of these birds.
 
User avatar
MrHMSH
Posts: 2610
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 7:32 pm

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 1:52 pm

xwb565 wrote:
MrHMSH wrote:

Not sure! I know DL are taking over some orders from LATAM, but I don't know if they're taking existing ones or ones that are yet to be built. A359s delivered now have the wing twist and new sharklet, so they are capable of being 280T out of the box. I would speculate that DL's future deliveries will have this option implemented so it's the closest it can be to a 77L replacement.


They have already have four of these birds.


Were they delivered new to DL? I know at least a couple of DL's birds are new enough to have the new sharklets.
 
TonyClifton
Posts: 181
Joined: Thu May 14, 2020 3:19 pm

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 1:53 pm

Lufthansa wrote:
TonyClifton wrote:

Removing the 777 removes an entire fleet type from the equation. Pilots, tech ops, scheduling. There’s 18 777s while over 100 combined 757/767s. Totally more sense to eliminate the odd one out, especially when 288 seats and ULH range isn’t needed for a long time.


If they want to restart that route, they are going to need to carry that extra cargo to make it viable. In this case the ULH range wasn't needed, its ability
to lift extra weight (due to its increased thrust and ability to have the extra fuel tanks fitted for the weight) meant that if they weren't carrying extra fuel
that weight carrying capability could be used for freight. There was a huge amount in both directions and remember LAX has mountains at one end and
relatively shorter runways. QF had often been forced to offload cargo for pax during times of the year. That's why the type was stuck on the route.
If they want to restart it and still carry cargo (the only thing actually brining money in long haul ATM) then they'll need to buy the A359URL, which means
additional capital expenditure. Ditto for runway performance at JNB.

So that means additional capital expenditure beyond the current order or dump both of these cities.
Which is looking more likely too given it looks like theres a significant chance Virgin Australia wont be around
to feed delta flights. And if you note i didn't say all the 767s or even mention 757s. I said older 767s.

Internally, at DL 75/76 are common fleet, 764 excepted. Hence removing the 777 gains flight ops efficiencies, rather than a slimmer 75/76 fleet which will also see older birds beer-canned IMHO. Keeping an entire fleet of 18 jets for one maybe two routes will never offset the actual fleet cost. Again, I’m fairly confident DL knows what they’re doing here.
 
jayunited
Posts: 2765
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 1:54 pm

MrHMSH wrote:
It was said earlier on this forum that part of the problem was the diversion, the diversion was BNE which would have made life difficult for the A350, but now that CBR is possible the issue is resolved. Otherwise it could be that DL's birds are (were?) 268T. If DL went for the 275T version (or obviously the 280T) then there's no issue, the A359 should carry more payload both ways SYD-LAX.

Why weren't A359s used to SYD before? If you have them you have to fly the 77Ls somewhere, so might as well be on a route where you can use its enormous payload potential.



What you are saying makes no sense at all, even the earlier versions of the A359 are more capable than any 789 UA operates. The diversion to BNE would have made life difficult for a A359 but not a 789? UA has diverted into BNE multiple times especially during the summer time when thunderstorms fire up and cause a last minute diversion. UA also uses a 789 on LAX-MEL although on that flight the amount of cargo is reduced to around 10,000 - 15,000 pounds if the flight is full. LAX-MEL is further than LAX-SYD, but yet you expect people to believe DL's A359s could not handle LAX-SYD because the diversion airport would have made life difficult which really means it would cause weight restriction. Was DL moving 40,000+ pounds of cargo on this flight every night?
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 19033
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 1:58 pm

Lufthansa wrote:
jeffrey0032j wrote:
United857 wrote:
The A359ULR doesn't improve cargo capacity. The MTOW is the same between the normal 900 (the new version post-wing twist with the new winglets) and ULR at 280t. The only difference is that the ULR has larger fuel tanks (electronically limited on the normal 900, physical tanks are the same), so you can take on more fuel if you are fuel volume limited and below MTOW, but the ULR doesn't allow you to take on additional payload if the 900 was already at MTOW.

The ULR has forward cargo hold deactivated, so total cargo capacity is reduced vs standard 359. This is the reason why SQ hasn't flown any of their ULRs since grounding them.


All the more reason to keep a small 77L sub fleet.


Yet DL has already decided that reason wasn't enough to justify continuing with the 77L.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
xwb565
Posts: 159
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2018 1:01 pm

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 1:59 pm

MrHMSH wrote:
xwb565 wrote:
MrHMSH wrote:

Not sure! I know DL are taking over some orders from LATAM, but I don't know if they're taking existing ones or ones that are yet to be built. A359s delivered now have the wing twist and new sharklet, so they are capable of being 280T out of the box. I would speculate that DL's future deliveries will have this option implemented so it's the closest it can be to a 77L replacement.


They have already have four of these birds.


Were they delivered new to DL? I know at least a couple of DL's birds are new enough to have the new sharklets.


512dn onward.
 
User avatar
MrHMSH
Posts: 2610
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 7:32 pm

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 2:01 pm

jayunited wrote:
MrHMSH wrote:
It was said earlier on this forum that part of the problem was the diversion, the diversion was BNE which would have made life difficult for the A350, but now that CBR is possible the issue is resolved. Otherwise it could be that DL's birds are (were?) 268T. If DL went for the 275T version (or obviously the 280T) then there's no issue, the A359 should carry more payload both ways SYD-LAX.

Why weren't A359s used to SYD before? If you have them you have to fly the 77Ls somewhere, so might as well be on a route where you can use its enormous payload potential.



What you are saying makes no sense at all, even the earlier versions of the A359 are more capable than any 789 UA operates. The diversion to BNE would have made life difficult for a A359 but not a 789? UA has diverted into BNE multiple times especially during the summer time when thunderstorms fire up and cause a last minute diversion. UA also uses a 789 on LAX-MEL although on that flight the amount of cargo is reduced to around 10,000 - 15,000 pounds if the flight is full. LAX-MEL is further than LAX-SYD, but yet you expect people to believe DL's A359s could not handle LAX-SYD because the diversion airport would have made life difficult which really means it would cause weight restriction. Was DL moving 40,000+ pounds of cargo on this flight every night?


I'm passing on the speculation, unfortunately I can't say with any certainty what restrictions there are on the A350 for SYD. BNE may well have been an issue for the 789 as well, but if CBR has always been available to UA then there would be no need for it.

I would imagine that DL was getting very good cargo loads to SYD, because that's what the 77L excels at, but I wouldn't know where to find data for how much they carried.

For the record, I have always been in the camp that thinks the A359 can make SYD-LAX both ways with full passenger load and room for some cargo.
 
DylanHarvey
Posts: 320
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 5:45 pm

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 2:10 pm

MrHMSH wrote:
jayunited wrote:
MrHMSH wrote:
It was said earlier on this forum that part of the problem was the diversion, the diversion was BNE which would have made life difficult for the A350, but now that CBR is possible the issue is resolved. Otherwise it could be that DL's birds are (were?) 268T. If DL went for the 275T version (or obviously the 280T) then there's no issue, the A359 should carry more payload both ways SYD-LAX.

Why weren't A359s used to SYD before? If you have them you have to fly the 77Ls somewhere, so might as well be on a route where you can use its enormous payload potential.



What you are saying makes no sense at all, even the earlier versions of the A359 are more capable than any 789 UA operates. The diversion to BNE would have made life difficult for a A359 but not a 789? UA has diverted into BNE multiple times especially during the summer time when thunderstorms fire up and cause a last minute diversion. UA also uses a 789 on LAX-MEL although on that flight the amount of cargo is reduced to around 10,000 - 15,000 pounds if the flight is full. LAX-MEL is further than LAX-SYD, but yet you expect people to believe DL's A359s could not handle LAX-SYD because the diversion airport would have made life difficult which really means it would cause weight restriction. Was DL moving 40,000+ pounds of cargo on this flight every night?


I'm passing on the speculation, unfortunately I can't say with any certainty what restrictions there are on the A350 for SYD. BNE may well have been an issue for the 789 as well, but if CBR has always been available to UA then there would be no need for it.

I would imagine that DL was getting very good cargo loads to SYD, because that's what the 77L excels at, but I wouldn't know where to find data for how much they carried.

For the record, I have always been in the camp that thinks the A359 can make SYD-LAX both ways with full passenger load and room for some cargo.

I remember seeing a forum a while ago, maybe more than a few months that DL sometimes took close to 53t of payload to SYD on the 77L, the 359 should take in the mid to low 40s tonnage wise if I remember.
 
B757Forever
Posts: 877
Joined: Tue May 04, 2010 3:23 am

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 2:15 pm

xwb565 wrote:
MrHMSH wrote:
xwb565 wrote:

They have already have four of these birds.


Were they delivered new to DL? I know at least a couple of DL's birds are new enough to have the new sharklets.


512dn onward.


YES! Ship 3512 and up have the newer sharklet which is significantly larger than the sharklets on ships 3501-3511. Just guessing, it could be 3 feet longer. Ships 3512-3515 have the higher gross weight. I don't know the specs on the four aircraft acquired from LATAM, it's my understanding the new orders picked up from LATAM have not been spec'd yet.
The Rolls Royce Dart. Noise = Shaft Horsepower.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8269
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 2:37 pm

AirwayBill wrote:
Lufthansa wrote:
All the more reason to keep a small 77L sub fleet.


The high costs of keeping such a small subfleet of airliners easily offsets any benefits it could possibly bring the airline, even with one or two so-called "golden routes" that could take advantage of a possible 77L advantage (which apparently Delta doesn't really hold dear all that much given the phenomenal capabilities of the A350).


Well, the costs of 77L is a good topic for brainstorming.

When oil was $100/bbl, yes it was, do you expect oil to go back to that level over next decade. Greta may not be happy but bean counters will remain happy. Complete mx outsourcing is always an option for small sub-fleet. And as always DL Techops will keep an eye on rhetorical Craigslist and stock up parts enough for next 10 years. Delta knows how to keep the costs low.

On the other hand, many bustling airports from pre-COVID19 era won't be that busy, tech stops may become cheaper, making ULH unnecessary. Servicing lavs and sanitizing cabins every 8-9hrs may become a necessity if COVID-19 continues play a major role in human life.
All posts are just opinions.
 
airbazar
Posts: 10110
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 2:40 pm

xwb565 wrote:
There was never any problem. All of Delta's a350s are 606k lbs mtow at minimum. The last four delivered are at 617k. Even the lighter ones would lift more than a 789 on Lax-Syd. The newer 350s operate 17 hour sectors with 35t payloads for other operators. The memo mentions the enhancements allow the aircraft to operate at a lower cost than the 777. This simply means the 77l was lifting a substantial enough cargo load over the 606k a350s on the Lax-Syd to overcome any fuel burn advantage. The 617k birds not only offer a higher mtow but they are also lighter and burn less fuel. This in the covid scenario has probably tipped the cost advantage back to a350.


But before the Pandemic cargo prices were in the gutter so using a more expensive aircraft to transport cheap cargo doesn't seem to make a lot of sense. There has to be something else in this equation that I'm missing.

I suspect it was merely a case of having spare 77L's and putting them where they are better suited to maximize their value (or minimize their losses). This is exactly how the 752 saw its life extended after it became uncompetitive over short haul, by putting it on TATL routes. I find it hard to believe that a UA 789 can fly SFO-SYD and even SFO-SIN but a DL A359 can't fly LAX-SYD. That just doesn't pass the sniff test.
 
xwb565
Posts: 159
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2018 1:01 pm

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 2:44 pm

airbazar wrote:

But before the Pandemic cargo prices were in the gutter so using a more expensive aircraft to transport cheap cargo doesn't seem to make a lot of sense. There has to be something else in this equation that I'm missing.

I suspect it was merely a case of having spare 77L's and putting them where they are better suited to maximize their value (or minimize their losses). I find it hard to believe that a UA 789 can fly SFO-SYD and even SFO-SIN but a DL A359 can't fly LAX-SYD. That just doesn't pass the sniff test.



It never did from a technical point of view, but the uplift on the LR was extreme as pointed by a poster above. Something has changed between the better capabilities of the newer 350s and the present scenario. I doubt the exact difference in the recipe will be known.
 
DylanHarvey
Posts: 320
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 5:45 pm

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 2:46 pm

B757Forever wrote:
xwb565 wrote:
MrHMSH wrote:

Were they delivered new to DL? I know at least a couple of DL's birds are new enough to have the new sharklets.


512dn onward.


YES! Ship 3512 and up have the newer sharklet which is significantly larger than the sharklets on ships 3501-3511. Just guessing, it could be 3 feet longer. Ships 3512-3515 have the higher gross weight. I don't know the specs on the four aircraft acquired from LATAM, it's my understanding the new orders picked up from LATAM have not been spec'd yet.

I think only PR-XTM has the new sharklets from LATAM.
 
WorldFlier
Posts: 374
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 2:10 pm

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 2:49 pm

acavpics wrote:
WorldFlier wrote:
acavpics wrote:
I understand them retiring the ER's. But, Why the LR's though? Those are barely a decade old.


0) Cash is King right now
1) Cash Operating Cost of 77L is probably much higher than the other birds
2) Where do you *need* a 77L that the Cash Operating Cost can be justified

1+2 = Dead 77L


Then why not store them long term like AA did with the A330-200's?


Storage still costs money, and if you plan to replace them or shrink the airline before they're needed again I believe it makes sense to dispose of them one way or another.
 
mxaxai
Posts: 1807
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:29 am

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 3:02 pm

WorldFlier wrote:
Storage still costs money, and if you plan to replace them or shrink the airline before they're needed again I believe it makes sense to dispose of them one way or another.

As long as DL is hoping to eventually sell them in a usable condition (or even as parts), they will put them in long term storage. DL is not dumping them on a landfill nor is it guaranteed that they will be scrapped. This decision only means that they will not fly for Delta again.
 
SonomaFlyer
Posts: 2231
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 2:47 pm

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 3:10 pm

xwb565 wrote:
airbazar wrote:

But before the Pandemic cargo prices were in the gutter so using a more expensive aircraft to transport cheap cargo doesn't seem to make a lot of sense. There has to be something else in this equation that I'm missing.

I suspect it was merely a case of having spare 77L's and putting them where they are better suited to maximize their value (or minimize their losses). I find it hard to believe that a UA 789 can fly SFO-SYD and even SFO-SIN but a DL A359 can't fly LAX-SYD. That just doesn't pass the sniff test.



It never did from a technical point of view, but the uplift on the LR was extreme as pointed by a poster above. Something has changed between the better capabilities of the newer 350s and the present scenario. I doubt the exact difference in the recipe will be known.


DL is in survival mode. Simplifying their fleet saves money. The older aircraft not only burn more fuel, they cost more to maintain. The HGW 350s won't lift as much cargo to places like SYD as the 77L but they are cheaper to fly down to SYD which in a challenging revenue environment makes them compelling.

The 789 has more legs but is smaller. IIRC, UA flies them with around 268 seats whereas the 359 for DL has 306 seats plus can carry more cargo if needed.

We are entering a strange new world where the industry will look very different in a year. DL is shifting its entire business strategy on a dime to adapt to the new reality. Gone will be the multiple fleet types in favor of just a few but spanning the seating capacities to enable them to up or downgauge as needed.
 
Exeiowa
Posts: 327
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2018 4:49 pm

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 3:18 pm

xwb565 wrote:
airbazar wrote:

But before the Pandemic cargo prices were in the gutter so using a more expensive aircraft to transport cheap cargo doesn't seem to make a lot of sense. There has to be something else in this equation that I'm missing.

I suspect it was merely a case of having spare 77L's and putting them where they are better suited to maximize their value (or minimize their losses). I find it hard to believe that a UA 789 can fly SFO-SYD and even SFO-SIN but a DL A359 can't fly LAX-SYD. That just doesn't pass the sniff test.



It never did from a technical point of view, but the uplift on the LR was extreme as pointed by a poster above. Something has changed between the better capabilities of the newer 350s and the present scenario. I doubt the exact difference in the recipe will be known.


When I think about this topic I imagine an oddly shaped table cloth covering an unusually shaped table and trying to figure out how to cover the most table rather than about optimally covering one sticking out appendage of that table.
 
jordanh
Posts: 323
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2017 11:56 pm

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 3:29 pm

aemoreira1981 wrote:
I wonder if JFK-BOM might come back on the A359, as that should be possible with the 280t A359s. That said, given that the B77Ls are owned outright, I'm surprised they're being retired. (TPAC from SEA can be covered by the A339.)



I know a lot of people here think JFK-BOM would not come back, but it is back already. Starting tomorrow, they will be flying JFK-BOM, but only flying cargo for now. They have been doing something similar from Asia for the past month.
 
WorldFlier
Posts: 374
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 2:10 pm

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 3:40 pm

mxaxai wrote:
WorldFlier wrote:
Storage still costs money, and if you plan to replace them or shrink the airline before they're needed again I believe it makes sense to dispose of them one way or another.

As long as DL is hoping to eventually sell them in a usable condition (or even as parts), they will put them in long term storage. DL is not dumping them on a landfill nor is it guaranteed that they will be scrapped. This decision only means that they will not fly for Delta again.


If they find a buyer (like the A380s that will be shed by a certain airline very soon), I will be shocked. Unless, of course, the price is free to negative or Boeing buys them back with Daddy's (Uncle Sam) credit card.
 
jodieellis
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2018 6:34 am

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 3:41 pm

Where will the 77L go?
 
User avatar
1337Delta764
Posts: 5878
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 4:02 am

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 3:46 pm

reltney wrote:
nicode wrote:
So DL will have an only Airbuses widebodies fleet.

..Boeing announcement next week...
]

Cheers


I just hope that announcement is really for new Boeing aircraft and not an announcement to phase out all Boeing aircraft.
 
nycbjr
Posts: 215
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 6:45 am

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 3:49 pm

Sad, but a sound business decision, I have many good memories of flights on DL 777's!
 
jayunited
Posts: 2765
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 5:13 pm

SonomaFlyer wrote:
DL is in survival mode. Simplifying their fleet saves money. The older aircraft not only burn more fuel, they cost more to maintain. The HGW 350s won't lift as much cargo to places like SYD as the 77L but they are cheaper to fly down to SYD which in a challenging revenue environment makes them compelling.

The 789 has more legs but is smaller. IIRC, UA flies them with around 268 seats whereas the 359 for DL has 306 seats plus can carry more cargo if needed.

We are entering a strange new world where the industry will look very different in a year. DL is shifting its entire business strategy on a dime to adapt to the new reality. Gone will be the multiple fleet types in favor of just a few but spanning the seating capacities to enable them to up or downgauge as needed.



Nice try with the seat count AA which also prior to COVID-19 operated LAX-SYD with their 789s. AA on their 789s have squeezed 285 seats on to a jet that is smaller than the A359. I don' know how much cargo AA was carrying but even then DL's problem with their A359s doesn't make sense.

I'm not trying to ruffle feathers but I've never understood the problem DL always referred to and why DL is the only airline that had this problem but they have never clearly articulated what the problem was especially as it pertains to LAX-SYD. This can't be all about cargo, now granted before the A359s enter service the 77L most certainly was the right aircraft for the job because the 77Es (UA's) struggled on these routes to carry the passengers with no cargo. So a 77L v.s. a 77E, the 77L is the right aircraft for the job, but to say the A359 was not capable do to a problem I'm just curious to know what the "real" problem was if there even was one.

I completely understand why DL is retiring their entire 777 fleet I get it all airlines are in survival mode and making difficult decisions. The pilot memo that says the problem has been fixed is what really peaked my interest because the problem has never been fully defined.
 
jeffrey0032j
Posts: 783
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:11 pm

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 5:20 pm

SonomaFlyer wrote:
xwb565 wrote:
airbazar wrote:

But before the Pandemic cargo prices were in the gutter so using a more expensive aircraft to transport cheap cargo doesn't seem to make a lot of sense. There has to be something else in this equation that I'm missing.

I suspect it was merely a case of having spare 77L's and putting them where they are better suited to maximize their value (or minimize their losses). I find it hard to believe that a UA 789 can fly SFO-SYD and even SFO-SIN but a DL A359 can't fly LAX-SYD. That just doesn't pass the sniff test.



It never did from a technical point of view, but the uplift on the LR was extreme as pointed by a poster above. Something has changed between the better capabilities of the newer 350s and the present scenario. I doubt the exact difference in the recipe will be known.


DL is in survival mode. Simplifying their fleet saves money. The older aircraft not only burn more fuel, they cost more to maintain. The HGW 350s won't lift as much cargo to places like SYD as the 77L but they are cheaper to fly down to SYD which in a challenging revenue environment makes them compelling.

The 789 has more legs but is smaller. IIRC, UA flies them with around 268 seats whereas the 359 for DL has 306 seats plus can carry more cargo if needed.

We are entering a strange new world where the industry will look very different in a year. DL is shifting its entire business strategy on a dime to adapt to the new reality. Gone will be the multiple fleet types in favor of just a few but spanning the seating capacities to enable them to up or downgauge as needed.

789 is smaller than an A350, but is good replacement for the ex-NW A330s, which are starting coming up to age. I am guessing a 787 order to replace 767s and 330ceos, especially the oldest ones. Delivery could be mid term, 3 to 5 years out so no immediate funding requirements.
 
marcelh
Posts: 1010
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 12:43 pm

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 5:38 pm

jeffrey0032j wrote:
SonomaFlyer wrote:
xwb565 wrote:


It never did from a technical point of view, but the uplift on the LR was extreme as pointed by a poster above. Something has changed between the better capabilities of the newer 350s and the present scenario. I doubt the exact difference in the recipe will be known.


DL is in survival mode. Simplifying their fleet saves money. The older aircraft not only burn more fuel, they cost more to maintain. The HGW 350s won't lift as much cargo to places like SYD as the 77L but they are cheaper to fly down to SYD which in a challenging revenue environment makes them compelling.

The 789 has more legs but is smaller. IIRC, UA flies them with around 268 seats whereas the 359 for DL has 306 seats plus can carry more cargo if needed.

We are entering a strange new world where the industry will look very different in a year. DL is shifting its entire business strategy on a dime to adapt to the new reality. Gone will be the multiple fleet types in favor of just a few but spanning the seating capacities to enable them to up or downgauge as needed.

789 is smaller than an A350, but is good replacement for the ex-NW A330s, which are starting coming up to age. I am guessing a 787 order to replace 767s and 330ceos, especially the oldest ones. Delivery could be mid term, 3 to 5 years out so no immediate funding requirements.

Why go for the 787, they already have the 339 into the fleet with more on order. What does the 789 add what the A332/3/9 and A359 don’t have and Delta really needs?
 
flyinghippo
Posts: 768
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 12:48 am

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 5:46 pm

jayunited wrote:
SonomaFlyer wrote:

I completely understand why DL is retiring their entire 777 fleet I get it all airlines are in survival mode and making difficult decisions. The pilot memo that says the problem has been fixed is what really peaked my interest because the problem has never been fully defined.


Some on this thread suggested increasing MTOW rating on existing A350s where DL paid Airbus to up the MTOW on paper. Maybe now DL can carry more fuel on their A350s to fly LAX-SYD-LAX both ways without worrying about a fuel stop? Just guessing here.
Last edited by flyinghippo on Fri May 15, 2020 5:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
BNAMealer
Posts: 775
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2019 8:03 pm

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 5:47 pm

marcelh wrote:
jeffrey0032j wrote:
SonomaFlyer wrote:

DL is in survival mode. Simplifying their fleet saves money. The older aircraft not only burn more fuel, they cost more to maintain. The HGW 350s won't lift as much cargo to places like SYD as the 77L but they are cheaper to fly down to SYD which in a challenging revenue environment makes them compelling.

The 789 has more legs but is smaller. IIRC, UA flies them with around 268 seats whereas the 359 for DL has 306 seats plus can carry more cargo if needed.

We are entering a strange new world where the industry will look very different in a year. DL is shifting its entire business strategy on a dime to adapt to the new reality. Gone will be the multiple fleet types in favor of just a few but spanning the seating capacities to enable them to up or downgauge as needed.

789 is smaller than an A350, but is good replacement for the ex-NW A330s, which are starting coming up to age. I am guessing a 787 order to replace 767s and 330ceos, especially the oldest ones. Delivery could be mid term, 3 to 5 years out so no immediate funding requirements.

Why go for the 787, they already have the 339 into the fleet with more on order. What does the 789 add what the A332/3/9 and A359 don’t have and Delta really needs?


Just a thought, they might be able to get a sweet deal on a combo MAX 8 or 9 and 789 order to replace all of their 717/73G/738’s and A332/333ceos
 
flyinghippo
Posts: 768
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 12:48 am

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 5:50 pm

SonomaFlyer wrote:

Why go for the 787, they already have the 339 into the fleet with more on order. What does the 789 add what the A332/3/9 and A359 don’t have and Delta really needs?


787 offers more range and cargo, if DL feels their future route requires a 332/3/9 sized plane with more legs, 788/9 might be a good fit. I'm sure Boeing will offer DL a REALLY good price if Delta placed an order in 2020. (to be delivered in late 2020, hopefully the industry has recovered by then)
 
User avatar
flee
Posts: 1277
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 8:14 am

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 5:59 pm

flyinghippo wrote:
SonomaFlyer wrote:
Why go for the 787, they already have the 339 into the fleet with more on order. What does the 789 add what the A332/3/9 and A359 don’t have and Delta really needs?

787 offers more range and cargo, if DL feels their future route requires a 332/3/9 sized plane with more legs, 788/9 might be a good fit. I'm sure Boeing will offer DL a REALLY good price if Delta placed an order in 2020. (to be delivered in late 2020, hopefully the industry has recovered by then)

DL is attempting to downsize its fleet and reduce aircraft types and staff headcounts. I very much doubt that they will be ordering any new aircraft in 2020.

Corvid-19 has caused demand to vanish and most airlines are not looking at expansion. They will be lucky to survive this!
 
User avatar
hOMSaR
Moderator
Posts: 2337
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 4:47 am

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 6:00 pm

flyinghippo wrote:
I'm sure Boeing will offer DL a REALLY good price if Delta placed an order in 2020. (to be delivered in late 2020, hopefully the industry has recovered by then)


If anyone seriously expected there was any hope of the industry recovering by the end of 2020, Delta wouldn't be retiring their 777s this year.
I was raised by a cup of coffee.
 
KMCOFlyer
Posts: 229
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 5:32 am

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 6:13 pm

flee wrote:
DL is attempting to downsize its fleet and reduce aircraft types and staff headcounts. I very much doubt that they will be ordering any new aircraft in 2020.

Corvid-19 has caused demand to vanish and most airlines are not looking at expansion. They will be lucky to survive this!


Yes but DL is going to eventually need to order a smaller narrow body replacement. Looking at the current fleet retirement projections, DL has no planned replacements for the MD-88s/90, 717s, and A320s most are 20+ years old and will need replacement soon. Might as well put orders in now to take advantage of deals and have delivery set up to be positioned when demand returns.
 
ethernal
Posts: 295
Joined: Mon May 06, 2019 12:09 pm

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 6:15 pm

WorldFlier wrote:
mxaxai wrote:
WorldFlier wrote:
Storage still costs money, and if you plan to replace them or shrink the airline before they're needed again I believe it makes sense to dispose of them one way or another.

As long as DL is hoping to eventually sell them in a usable condition (or even as parts), they will put them in long term storage. DL is not dumping them on a landfill nor is it guaranteed that they will be scrapped. This decision only means that they will not fly for Delta again.


If they find a buyer (like the A380s that will be shed by a certain airline very soon), I will be shocked. Unless, of course, the price is free to negative or Boeing buys them back with Daddy's (Uncle Sam) credit card.


The big difference between these 777s and the A380s:

* The 777s have a big ecosystem of parts and maintenance available
* All of Delta's 777s just passed a D-check as part of their refurb. Their 777LRs are only 10 years old - younger than many A380s.
* The A380s are not well suited to cargo hauling and are not present in any existing cargo fleets

At the very least, the 777s will be picked up opportunistically for freight. They will not go through a P2F conversion. Typically when airliners are retired, it is because they are about to hit up against a D-check. When the freight company buys them, they have to do the D-check anyways, and they run the P2F concurrent to the D-check. In this case, the planes are good to fly for 10+ years (if not longer on low-duty freight cycles).

It is a no-brainer for a freight company with an existing 777 fleet to buy these (especially the young LRs) if they can get them at a firesale price, rip out the seats, put heavy cargo in the underbelly, and bulk out the passenger cabin (the passenger cabin floor is not suitable for heavy cargo without retrofit). If they don't max out payload, who cares? They were bought for pennies on the dollar. They're flex capacity for high-demand needs.
 
jeffrey0032j
Posts: 783
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:11 pm

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 6:19 pm

marcelh wrote:
jeffrey0032j wrote:
SonomaFlyer wrote:

DL is in survival mode. Simplifying their fleet saves money. The older aircraft not only burn more fuel, they cost more to maintain. The HGW 350s won't lift as much cargo to places like SYD as the 77L but they are cheaper to fly down to SYD which in a challenging revenue environment makes them compelling.

The 789 has more legs but is smaller. IIRC, UA flies them with around 268 seats whereas the 359 for DL has 306 seats plus can carry more cargo if needed.

We are entering a strange new world where the industry will look very different in a year. DL is shifting its entire business strategy on a dime to adapt to the new reality. Gone will be the multiple fleet types in favor of just a few but spanning the seating capacities to enable them to up or downgauge as needed.

789 is smaller than an A350, but is good replacement for the ex-NW A330s, which are starting coming up to age. I am guessing a 787 order to replace 767s and 330ceos, especially the oldest ones. Delivery could be mid term, 3 to 5 years out so no immediate funding requirements.

Why go for the 787, they already have the 339 into the fleet with more on order. What does the 789 add what the A332/3/9 and A359 don’t have and Delta really needs?

Never write off what a good deal can do, and no fleet is safe if a plane has proven itself better than another. This gives DL a chance to compare both fleets. The A310s didn't last at DL, so if they are happier with either 787 or 330neo, they could dump the other. My opinion is that there are a lot more potential to the 787 than the 330neo in terms of future improvements, so that may tip the scale.
 
User avatar
Web500sjc
Posts: 855
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 4:23 am

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 6:19 pm

flyinghippo wrote:
jayunited wrote:
SonomaFlyer wrote:

I completely understand why DL is retiring their entire 777 fleet I get it all airlines are in survival mode and making difficult decisions. The pilot memo that says the problem has been fixed is what really peaked my interest because the problem has never been fully defined.


Some on this thread suggested increasing MTOW rating on existing A350s where DL paid Airbus to up the MTOW on paper. Does it mean DL can carry more fuel on their A350s to fly LAX-SYD-LAX both ways without worrying about a fuel stop? I'm a bit lost on increasing MTOW on paper without making physical improvements on the plane... anyone can shed some light on this?



Raising the MTOW allows the aircraft to be heavier at T/O. This means the aircraft can carry more fuel, Payload or both. It doesn’t exclusively extend to the range, it just allows a certain payload to be carried further. Alternatively it can allow a larger payload to be carried over the same distance.

In the case of SYD-LAX for Delta, a350 could always make the route, the question is how the A350 compared to other aircraft in the fleet. The A350 presumably could not reliably carry the same amount of revenue that the 77L could when doing the route under the DL constraints. As a direct example, look at UA vs DL when they operated the 77E and 77L on SYD-LAX, the UA 77E could make the route, but often left behind cargo. The DL 77L often left with a full belly and passenger cabin, thus taking more cargo and allowing a more diverse revenue stream. Second, the 77L has always been there and needed to fly somewhere. To this point there was not a reason to get rid of the 777 only to buy a brand new replacemen. There is no second hand market for the 77L, and the aircraft is a very good machine in the middle of its life cycle. That being said, the 777 can not just sit o. The tarmac looking pretty and it best to put it a route that best exemplify the strength (payload at extreme range). So the 777 has been flying to SYD and JNB.

Before COVID, DL was renewing their ULH fleet, first exchanging the 747 for an A350, and eventually they would be trading their 777 for A350s/339s. In the new COVID market, the decision isn’t about renewing /replacing the fleet (buying a new Airbus to replace a perfectly fine 77L). It is about simplifying the fleet, getting rid of inefficiency and downsizing to meet demand. In this case, DL is downsizing the ULH fleet by removing the 777.
Boiler Up!
 
mxaxai
Posts: 1807
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:29 am

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 6:21 pm

KMCOFlyer wrote:
Yes but DL is going to eventually need to order a smaller narrow body replacement. Looking at the current fleet retirement projections, DL has no planned replacements for the MD-88s/90, 717s, and A320s most are 20+ years old and will need replacement soon. Might as well put orders in now to take advantage of deals and have delivery set up to be positioned when demand returns.

That's what the A220 is for. They can order more when the time comes. I think DL will easily become the largest operator of the type.
 
User avatar
Spacepope
Posts: 4643
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 1999 11:10 am

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 6:21 pm

ethernal wrote:
WorldFlier wrote:
mxaxai wrote:
As long as DL is hoping to eventually sell them in a usable condition (or even as parts), they will put them in long term storage. DL is not dumping them on a landfill nor is it guaranteed that they will be scrapped. This decision only means that they will not fly for Delta again.


If they find a buyer (like the A380s that will be shed by a certain airline very soon), I will be shocked. Unless, of course, the price is free to negative or Boeing buys them back with Daddy's (Uncle Sam) credit card.


The big difference between these 777s and the A380s:

* The 777s have a big ecosystem of parts and maintenance available
* All of Delta's 777s just passed a D-check as part of their refurb. Their 777LRs are only 10 years old - younger than many A380s.
* The A380s are not well suited to cargo hauling and are not present in any existing cargo fleets

At the very least, the 777s will be picked up opportunistically for freight. They will not go through a P2F conversion. Typically when airliners are retired, it is because they are about to hit up against a D-check. When the freight company buys them, they have to do the D-check anyways, and they run t he P2F concurrent to the D-check. In this case, the planes are good to fly for 10+ years (if not longer on low-duty freight cycles).

It is a no-brainer for a freight company with an existing 777 fleet to buy these (especially the young LRs) if they can get them at a firesale price, rip out the seats, put heavy cargo in the underbelly, and bulk out the passenger cabin (the passenger cabin floor is not suitable for heavy cargo without retrofit). If they don't max out payload, who cares? They were bought for pennies on the dollar. They're flex capacity for high-demand needs.


Freight without a full conversion (of which there is none for the original-length models) is simply no going to happen. Bulk-loading the upper deck is massively inefficient, and only ever done in extreme situations like what we're seeing short-term here due to the pandemic.

The only large-ish freighters to do this were the Airborne DC-8 and 762 fleet, and after DHL took them over they cut doors in all those 762s anyway.

Unless IAI/Bedek back-port that 773ER P2F program onto a -200, these most definitely won't be picked up for some hillbilly-engineered make-work freighter flying.
The last of the famous international playboys
 
flyinghippo
Posts: 768
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 12:48 am

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 6:23 pm

If DL plays their cards right, they can really come out as the carrier with the most efficient fleet by the end of the decade. Boeing is dying for orders. DL might press Boeing into a killer deal where DL can replace their 73G/738/717/332/333/767 with Max8/9, 788/789, with delivery starting in 2026 and beyond (Assuming DL will weather this crisis), DL would have the youngest fleet out of all US carriers and greatly reduce their operating costs.

They would have:
A359 - Flagship, long haul routes such as DTW to Asia/AMS, LAX-SYD, ATL/JFK-JNB, JFK-BOM
A339 - Replaces current A333 on trunk routes from JFK/ATL/DTW to Europe, SEA to Asia and Europe, LAX to Europe
B788/9 - Replace current A332/B763/4 routes such as JFK-LHR/AMS/CDG, and open up new markets when the time is right (SEA-India if they want to compete with AA on this?)

A32N and Max8/9 for all 737/757 routes
A220 for 717/73G/ERJ routes

Not only increase efficiency but also reduce certs for pilots from 7 to 5

DL (and others) is getting rid of their inefficient planes quickly, and if/when this industry recovers, replacing them with newer, efficient machines that will shape their fortune for the next 20-30 years.

Just a theory...
Last edited by flyinghippo on Fri May 15, 2020 6:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
flyinghippo
Posts: 768
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 12:48 am

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 6:25 pm

hOMSaR wrote:
flyinghippo wrote:
I'm sure Boeing will offer DL a REALLY good price if Delta placed an order in 2020. (to be delivered in late 2020, hopefully the industry has recovered by then)


If anyone seriously expected there was any hope of the industry recovering by the end of 2020, Delta wouldn't be retiring their 777s this year.


Sorry - when I say late 2020... I should have said late 2020s... as in 2026 and beyond.
 
US319
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2019 7:33 am

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 6:34 pm

DL future longhaul widebody fleet will be 330/350. It seems many people cannot Accept that. Re the alleged killer deal. Airbus could even offer a better deal as Proven by Boeing - UA.
 
winginit
Posts: 2849
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 6:45 pm

mxaxai wrote:
KMCOFlyer wrote:
Yes but DL is going to eventually need to order a smaller narrow body replacement. Looking at the current fleet retirement projections, DL has no planned replacements for the MD-88s/90, 717s, and A320s most are 20+ years old and will need replacement soon. Might as well put orders in now to take advantage of deals and have delivery set up to be positioned when demand returns.

That's what the A220 is for. They can order more when the time comes. I think DL will easily become the largest operator of the type.


Bingo. 64 of them yet to be delivered in addition to of course the 100 321neos that are on order. Will they eventually need another narrowbody order? Of course, but given no one, not even the fleet planning minds at Delta or any other carrier, know what the travel landscape is really going to look like even next year means that's a problem for tomorrow, and by tomorrow we of course mean at least three years on the horizon.
 
jeffrey0032j
Posts: 783
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:11 pm

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 7:34 pm

US319 wrote:
DL future longhaul widebody fleet will be 330/350. It seems many people cannot Accept that. Re the alleged killer deal. Airbus could even offer a better deal as Proven by Boeing - UA.

Delta's future longhaul widebody fleet back in 2001 was to be 777s, look what happened? Realities change in a crisis, the A330neo is less favoured by financial institutions that fund these capital purchases, and that may change the dynamics here.
 
jagraham
Posts: 1071
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 11:10 pm

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 7:35 pm

tommy1808 wrote:
Nicknuzzii wrote:
Does the A350 have the legs to cover the 777?


Range isn't the Problem, the A350 can do everything an 77E can do with ease. The 77L .... not out of JNB and not with cargo on top of passengers. Aside of doing it with a lot less fuel, even an A351 would probably fall short on that one route.

Best regards
Thomas


A Sunrise configured A351, eg aux tank, fewer pax (probably don't need to go all the way down to 250 even for JNB) and ~323t MTOW will do the job. Even with some cargo.
 
jagraham
Posts: 1071
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 11:10 pm

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 7:48 pm

TonyClifton wrote:
Lufthansa wrote:
TonyClifton wrote:

Removing the 777 removes an entire fleet type from the equation. Pilots, tech ops, scheduling. There’s 18 777s while over 100 combined 757/767s. Totally more sense to eliminate the odd one out, especially when 288 seats and ULH range isn’t needed for a long time.


If they want to restart that route, they are going to need to carry that extra cargo to make it viable. In this case the ULH range wasn't needed, its ability
to lift extra weight (due to its increased thrust and ability to have the extra fuel tanks fitted for the weight) meant that if they weren't carrying extra fuel
that weight carrying capability could be used for freight. There was a huge amount in both directions and remember LAX has mountains at one end and
relatively shorter runways. QF had often been forced to offload cargo for pax during times of the year. That's why the type was stuck on the route.
If they want to restart it and still carry cargo (the only thing actually brining money in long haul ATM) then they'll need to buy the A359URL, which means
additional capital expenditure. Ditto for runway performance at JNB.

So that means additional capital expenditure beyond the current order or dump both of these cities.
Which is looking more likely too given it looks like theres a significant chance Virgin Australia wont be around
to feed delta flights. And if you note i didn't say all the 767s or even mention 757s. I said older 767s.

Internally, at DL 75/76 are common fleet, 764 excepted. Hence removing the 777 gains flight ops efficiencies, rather than a slimmer 75/76 fleet which will also see older birds beer-canned IMHO. Keeping an entire fleet of 18 jets for one maybe two routes will never offset the actual fleet cost. Again, I’m fairly confident DL knows what they’re doing here.


Older birds won't be scrapped, they're too popular as freighters. Otherwise, yeah. It is interesting that the 764s stayed . . probably no resale value and they are relatively new. And cheaper to operate than A332s to the European hubs.
 
tealnz
Posts: 635
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 10:47 am

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 8:46 pm

jayunited wrote:
ILikeTrains wrote:
How much cargo was Delta carrying on LAX-SYD or JNB-ATL?



I'm not sure about JNB-ATL but UA on LAX-SYD on a 789 can carry a full load of passengers which equates to around 300 bags and around 20,000-25,000 pounds of cargo, the same is true on return leg . The only time the 789 has problems coming out of SYD in during the summer when temperatures exceed 100 degrees F or 38 degrees C. Under those conditions UA on a 789 would have to jettison all the cargo out of SYD.


UA reportedly canned the LAX-SYD because the 789 struggled westbound when seasonal winds were at their peak. The new higher MTOW 280t A350s with the improved aero won’t have that problem.
 
User avatar
SLCUT2777
Posts: 3476
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 12:17 am

Re: DL to permanently retire entire 777 fleet

Fri May 15, 2020 9:02 pm

jagraham wrote:
TonyClifton wrote:
Lufthansa wrote:


Older birds won't be scrapped, they're too popular as freighters. Otherwise, yeah. It is interesting that the 764s stayed . . probably no resale value and they are relatively new. And cheaper to operate than A332s to the European hubs.


Once more A339's come on board, they're off to the desert as well.
DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
  • 1
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 15

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