Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
ContinentalEWR
Posts: 4296
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 2:50 am

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Tue Mar 02, 2021 12:34 pm

jagraham wrote:
ContinentalEWR wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
I will never understand this site (or the ridiculous Simple Flying's) membership's general obsession with the idea of DL as some used-aircraft hoarder, particularly widebodies.

DL's only had 9 CEOs in its history, and you have to go back literally halfway down that line (to Ron Allen, a quarter century ago) to find one whose team looked at CapEx on a used longhauler, and thought that that'd be a great way to spend money.

Sure things can change, and opportunities can arise.... but it's generally not their M.O., and they've been more than consistent with that through everything from the '90s Asian financial crisis, to 9/11, to the pre-Iraq era, through the '08 financial crunch, through the ensuing fuel insanity of the late '00s.



Why?



Since when was that ever an impediment to DL, particularly for longhaul?


DL isn't the carrier that was known for favoring older aircraft and refurbishing them down to the studs to keep them flying longer from a cost perspective. That was an NWA practice and some of it carried over into the merged company. NW refitted for instance the DC9-30s (or -50s, I don't remember the specific type) to a level where inside, they were basically 717s. DL applied a similar process with the A320/A319 refits a few years ago.


DL also did that with the 763s; ripped out the bins and seats, and put in new A330 like bins and the 1-2-1 J arrangement up front. DL is putting in D1 J seats on 764s that are similar to the other new D1s except for no door. They had just finished two reconfigurations of the 777s when they decided to park them. The A333s got D1. Plenty of reconfiguration and refurbishment of widebodies for DL; its just the purchase of used widebodies that is missing. However DL held off buying new also until 2 A339 orders and the A359 order; they had gone quite a while without buying a widebody before then.


Yes, Delta overhauled the entire 767-300ER fleet from nose to tail starting around 2010 or 2011. Those aren't A330 like bins. That is the after market Boeing Signature interior which UA also went for. AA did not, opting to just fix the cabin architecture at the front end of the 767. Delta overhauled the entire 777 fleet with the Delta One Suite, not just 2. Bt the time the 777 was parked for good at DL, all 18 units had the new interiors. The 777s were delivered in two batches and consisted of 2 models. The -200ERs began arriving in the late 1990s. The LRs (10 in total) were delivered starting around 2006.
 
User avatar
Boeing757100
Posts: 610
Joined: Wed May 06, 2020 10:09 pm

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:22 pm

It may be off-topic, but while we are all clashing around and deciding what should replace the DL 767-300ERs, it still soldiers on. While they are not getting premium select now, will the seats get some refresh at least? I mean, if DL did for their 744s basically right before they were retired, I'd have some hope that they might give the 763 seats a refresh? (Better IFE, padding, etc)
Boeing is re-engining the 707 tonight, with Shinkai as the CEO and FLAIRPORT as the CFO. He has the 757 tooling in giant snowglobe that tracks flights.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ub82Xb1 ... iceboxHero
 
ethernal
Posts: 482
Joined: Mon May 06, 2019 12:09 pm

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:26 pm

TTailedTiger wrote:
scbriml wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:
We will have to wait and see how future Delta leaders view Anderson's peculiar choice of the A330neo. Hawaiian ran away from it leaving Delta the only US operator and has very little popularity worldwide. I'm guessing resale value will be eye watering and DL will have to live with the bed they've made. The 787 on the other hand couldn't even be passed up by Boeing averse airlines like LH. The A330neo is quite comfortable in Delta's configuration but the 787 is just an incredible airplane as far as economics go.


Yeah, because DL has a long history of making bad fleet decisions. In all honesty, it just sounds like you're really upset DL hasn't ordered 787s.


It would appear they may have made some bad fleet decisions. Why else would they get rid of 737's and 777's there were barely over ten years old? The 787 is a category of its own. It really has no competitor that can match its smaller size and economics. The A330 is an aging 1980's design and the A350 competes with the 77W/779. A 787 can efficiently operate JFK-LHR or LAX-SIN. Very versatile.


Every airline makes bad fleet decisions in the sense that predicting the future is impossible. But the 73G was hardly a blunder; they were ordered 14 years ago pre-merger before Delta had alternative airframes. They were used for high and hot airports and short-runway ops that no other plane (possibly other than an expensive to operate and payload restricted 757). Given that it was the same type as the rest of the 737NG fleet, the marginal cost of adding them to the fleet was low. With the advent of the NW merger and their large fleet of A319s and the arrival of the A222/3, the 737 fleet type was made fully (or almost fully) redundant. Delta took COVID as an opportunity to simplify their fleet ops and eliminate a subtype that was no longer needed.

The 777s are perhaps a slightly better example of a fleet misstep - although it is pretty obvious why Delta ordered them. Delta needed an aircraft that could operate several existing and important routes that had previously been flown by the aging and expensive 744. Any East Coast - Asia route needed it and many West Coast-Europe routes (including to the key CDG/AMS alliance hubs) needed the legs of the 744/777 at the time. A 763 would struggle to make those flights (maybe on a good day in the summer) and the MD-11s were retired in 2004.

In my opinion, Delta did misstep overextend when they bought the LR type with different engines. They bought it for a few select routes - LAX-SYD, ATL-JNB, etc - exactly the kind of thing you want to avoid as a large international network carrier. It created two small subfleets of their own volition. The other misstep was when they refurbished the the 777 fleet in 2018/2019 with 9-abreast in Economy and a large C+ cabin. Amazing for passenger comfort but terrible for CASM/flight economics. With the advent of the A359 and the terrible economics of how Delta configured their two small subfleets of 777s, it was obvious why they got removed from the fleet.

Regardless, this just proves my point on the "763 has to be replaced like for like!" piece. Whenever an airline starts picking aircraft types for a few select routes, it leads to trouble. With the 73G, it made sense because they already owned the fleet type. It was justifiable. The first purchase of the 777-200ERs were probably justifiable because of several key, profitable routes that were key to Delta's route network at the time (access to APAC and European partner/alliance gateways). The 777-200LRs were probably a mistake to add a few extra vanity routes not essential to Delta's route network.

There are no key routes for the network that Delta will lose if the 763 goes away. They can still successfully fly to all major JV hubs from their hubs. They can still fly to all major JV hubs from larger non-hubs. They may have to reconsider marginal routes like an IND-CDG. While nice to have, they are not key to the network. They don't justify having yet-another-aircraft-type in the fleet. The number of routes permanently lost due to COVID is far greater than the number of routes that may hypothetically be lost because the A339 capital cost inclusive trip costs are ever so slightly higher than a fully depreciated 763.

The A339neo probably won't be viewed as a mistake long term. It also won't be viewed as a stroke of genius. It will be viewed as a suitable purchase for what Delta needed - a coin flip done at the time in terms of what was the better value for Delta. The only potential issue I see down the road is that depending on what happens in 25 years when Delta seeks to retire them is whether they have to take on a new fleet type in the interim as opposed to a more natural glidepath to a next-generation 787 frame or something similar. With the existing body of A330ceos (including the long-living freighter variant) and the number of current A339 orders and deliveries, it will avoid being a formal orphan fleet any time soon.
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 8750
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:34 pm

Yep, exactly.

And like I said upthread, the next window of opportunity for a new widebody fleet type, would be the B764 replacement then rolling into the original PMNW A332/A333s.
That would be for aircraft deliveries around the turn of the decade.
Anything before then is going to be A339 and A359s, of the order backlog they currently have.
 
Prost
Posts: 2613
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:23 pm

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Tue Mar 02, 2021 3:08 pm

My opinion is the 767-300ER is too small for Delta in a non-covid business environment. I say this because passengers now expect the Premium Economy product offering, and the 767-300ER seem to small to offer the optimum mix of D1, Premium Economy, Comfort + and Economy. Again, just my opinion.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 2215
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Tue Mar 02, 2021 3:09 pm

TTailedTiger wrote:
scbriml wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:
We will have to wait and see how future Delta leaders view Anderson's peculiar choice of the A330neo. Hawaiian ran away from it leaving Delta the only US operator and has very little popularity worldwide. I'm guessing resale value will be eye watering and DL will have to live with the bed they've made. The 787 on the other hand couldn't even be passed up by Boeing averse airlines like LH. The A330neo is quite comfortable in Delta's configuration but the 787 is just an incredible airplane as far as economics go.


Yeah, because DL has a long history of making bad fleet decisions. In all honesty, it just sounds like you're really upset DL hasn't ordered 787s.


It would appear they may have made some bad fleet decisions. Why else would they get rid of 737's and 777's there were barely over ten years old? The 787 is a category of its own. It really has no competitor that can match its smaller size and economics. The A330 is an aging 1980's design and the A350 competes with the 77W/779. A 787 can efficiently operate JFK-LHR or LAX-SIN. Very versatile.

DL is simplifying its fleet when eliminating the 777s, and removing current over-capacity with the 737s. Nobody but DL knows exactly their fleet strategy.
Is AS making a bad fleet decision by eliminating as many Airbus as possible?
 
BrianDromey
Posts: 2966
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2006 2:23 am

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Tue Mar 02, 2021 3:48 pm

I didn't read the article because the authors content is low quality and devoid of any critical thinking. The topic of the article is interesting, "how will DL cover 767 flying", but the answer that DL has a "problem" and requires a 1:1 replacement is misguided. What does this "problem" not apply to United, American or other 767 operators? DL is hardly the first 767 operator to retire their fleet. The article misses the fundamental point that the A339 has a similar, if not lower, trip cost than the 767. So it has a lower per-seat cost than the 767. Sure all the seats may not be necessary, but there is zero cost to offering them.
DL has a large fleet of 737 and A321s that could be outfitted with lie-flat seats in F if they really want to control capacity. DL has an equally large fleet of A332, A333 and A339 that can be used, with much more cargo capacity, if they wish to keep the CASM down. No one has a 1:1 replacement for the 767, but neither Aribus nor Boeing offer one, suggesting that it is not needed.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15922
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Tue Mar 02, 2021 4:02 pm

AECM wrote:
Cubsrule wrote:
flyboy80 wrote:
The conclusion I've come to is Delta doesn't need a 76ER replacement and certainly not a bunch of 788 and A338 size planes for midwest and east coast to Europe (<9 hour flights). In terms of capacity, they can shift it toward the other fleet types as above posts state while reducing some complexity. I think Delta is betting on a couple things near term. The 767s home, the trans Atlantic market, is not going to be in the place it was before for a few years at least, so It makes sense to reduce capacity and flow pax over JV hubs. Some of the smaller points they served in the US to Europe, if they come back in the years ahead when the 76ER is actually gone, can be upgraded to a 764 if there is enough premium demand to justify or even an A333. As things recover more and evolve in the 2025 and beyond years, Delta can decide if it still makes sense to have a "small" trans Atlantic airplane fleet type again.


Do we know that the trip costs of the 339 are appreciably higher than the 76ER? Or that the trip costs will be higher in five years, when the 76ER fleet is pushing 30 years old? Because there are few or no routes where range, runway performance or the like is an issue, the additional capacity of the 339 is only a problem if that additional capacity comes with additional costs that cannot be covered by selling more tickets. It's not obvious to me whether that's the case.


I remember seeing a table from Delta DOT submission to Haneda slots were the Fuel Burn (gallons/hour) listed between the A339 doing SEA-HND and the B763 doing HNL-HND was basically the same.


It was posted in this thread viewtopic.php?t=1427155

Image
“Don't be a show-off. Never be too proud to turn back. There are old pilots and bold pilots, but no old, bold pilots.” E. Hamilton Lee, 1949
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 15050
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Tue Mar 02, 2021 4:24 pm

zeke wrote:
AECM wrote:
Cubsrule wrote:

Do we know that the trip costs of the 339 are appreciably higher than the 76ER? Or that the trip costs will be higher in five years, when the 76ER fleet is pushing 30 years old? Because there are few or no routes where range, runway performance or the like is an issue, the additional capacity of the 339 is only a problem if that additional capacity comes with additional costs that cannot be covered by selling more tickets. It's not obvious to me whether that's the case.


I remember seeing a table from Delta DOT submission to Haneda slots were the Fuel Burn (gallons/hour) listed between the A339 doing SEA-HND and the B763 doing HNL-HND was basically the same.


It was posted in this thread viewtopic.php?t=1427155

Image


Thank you for digging that out. It suggests that the fuel burn on similar flights will be lower for the 339 since HNL-HND is appreciably shorter than SEA-HND and you have to burn fuel to carry fuel.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
User avatar
HIA350
Posts: 92
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:51 pm

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Tue Mar 02, 2021 4:35 pm

ikolkyo wrote:
There is a reason they were all in on the NMA idea and haven't ordered XLRs.

so the NMA will be ready in 5 years?
 
User avatar
ikolkyo
Posts: 3129
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:43 pm

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Tue Mar 02, 2021 5:05 pm

HIA350 wrote:
ikolkyo wrote:
There is a reason they were all in on the NMA idea and haven't ordered XLRs.

so the NMA will be ready in 5 years?


When did I ever say that? All I said was that they are big fans of the NMA concept.
 
TTailedTiger
Posts: 2953
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:19 am

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Tue Mar 02, 2021 6:04 pm

Oliver2020 wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:
scbriml wrote:

Yeah, because DL has a long history of making bad fleet decisions. In all honesty, it just sounds like you're really upset DL hasn't ordered 787s.


It would appear they may have made some bad fleet decisions. Why else would they get rid of 737's and 777's there were barely over ten years old? The 787 is a category of its own. It really has no competitor that can match its smaller size and economics. The A330 is an aging 1980's design and the A350 competes with the 77W/779. A 787 can efficiently operate JFK-LHR or LAX-SIN. Very versatile.


Facts : Richard Anderson has acknowledged he could care less about nostalgia., as he is a business man not an aircraft or train enthusiast.
During the RFP for the 50-widebody aircraft wanted a proven technology aircraft.

Richard Anderson made a public statement as follows : Airbus really needs to STEP UP and reengine the A330
https://airwaysmag.com/industry/analysi ... d-747-400/

Richard Anderson also made the statement in public in reference to Boeing:
I can purchase a used 777 for 10 million dollars. Boeing responded that that wasn't the case.
Richard Anderson then made this statement publicly.
I was wrong about the price of a used 777 of 10 million dollars...we just signed a LOI(letter of intent) for a used 777 for
7.7 million dollars.

The difference is AIRBUS did step up and reengine the A330 and won the RFP fair and square.

Richard Anderson also purchased/acquired multiple aircraft for Delta that were McDonald Douglas and Boeing aircraft.
130-737-900ER......120..plus..10 put options....Airbus also placed 5-A321-200 put options on Delta as well 122.plus.5put options
Which is where the 127-A321-200-CEO number.
88-717-200/ex-MD95
49-MD-90-30 plus additional MD-90's for parts

267 total AC ----130 new Boeing AC plus 137-used Boeing/e-MD AC

In reference to the reason the the 10-737-700, 8-772ER, 10-772LR aircraft were due to cost cutting measures in reference
to the Covid19 pandemic. The above AC probably wouldn't have been retired in 2020 if it weren't for the pandemic.


The 777 that Delta bought for 7 million was unairworthy and only used for parts. Boeing was correct in their statement about not being able to get a 777 for 10 million.
 
Oliver2020
Posts: 223
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2019 5:39 am

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Tue Mar 02, 2021 7:08 pm

TTailedTiger wrote:
Oliver2020 wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:

It would appear they may have made some bad fleet decisions. Why else would they get rid of 737's and 777's there were barely over ten years old? The 787 is a category of its own. It really has no competitor that can match its smaller size and economics. The A330 is an aging 1980's design and the A350 competes with the 77W/779. A 787 can efficiently operate JFK-LHR or LAX-SIN. Very versatile.


Facts : Richard Anderson has acknowledged he could care less about nostalgia., as he is a business man not an aircraft or train enthusiast.
During the RFP for the 50-widebody aircraft wanted a proven technology aircraft.

Richard Anderson made a public statement as follows : Airbus really needs to STEP UP and reengine the A330
https://airwaysmag.com/industry/analysi ... d-747-400/

Richard Anderson also made the statement in public in reference to Boeing:
I can purchase a used 777 for 10 million dollars. Boeing responded that that wasn't the case.
Richard Anderson then made this statement publicly.
I was wrong about the price of a used 777 of 10 million dollars...we just signed a LOI(letter of intent) for a used 777 for
7.7 million dollars.

The difference is AIRBUS did step up and reengine the A330 and won the RFP fair and square.

Richard Anderson also purchased/acquired multiple aircraft for Delta that were McDonald Douglas and Boeing aircraft.
130-737-900ER......120..plus..10 put options....Airbus also placed 5-A321-200 put options on Delta as well 122.plus.5put options
Which is where the 127-A321-200-CEO number.
88-717-200/ex-MD95
49-MD-90-30 plus additional MD-90's for parts

267 total AC ----130 new Boeing AC plus 137-used Boeing/e-MD AC

In reference to the reason the the 10-737-700, 8-772ER, 10-772LR aircraft were due to cost cutting measures in reference
to the Covid19 pandemic. The above AC probably wouldn't have been retired in 2020 if it weren't for the pandemic.


The 777 that Delta bought for 7 million was unairworthy and only used for parts. Boeing was correct in their statement about not being able to get a 777 for 10 million.


Can you provide proof that the 777 was not air worthy( on this point to the best of my recollection Malaysia airlines was retiring the 772er with RR engines, and he saw an opportunity to purchase a cheap aircraft to prove to Boeing that it was possible to purchase a USED 777 below the 10million dollar mark).

Most likely the 777 which had RR engines ( the exact same engines as the 8-772ers in Deltas fleet at that time) , and other parts were worth the 7.7 million He used to purchase that 777. He was not obligated to admit that he wasn't going to refurbish that 777 and enter the AC into service. He only said that he signed a letter of intent to purchase that aircraft (which was a used 777).

Had Boeing provided the 18-787-8(aka the terrible teens) On time, within spec Delta wouldn't have been able to substitute other
aircraft on a dollar per dollar basis another statement from the worst CEO ever as he was concerned with making the company profitable not
buying the 787 to make Boeing happy.

IF Delta had accepted those 18-787-8 instead of substituting them for 130-737-900ER the18-788's would have been grounded twice.
Once due to the battery issue (approximately 2 months). NW ordered those 18-788 with RR engines which would have caused them to be
grounded again.


Please excuse any spelling mistakes or run on sentences as this is a long comment and difficult to correct as I'm using my iPhone.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 26091
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Tue Mar 02, 2021 7:14 pm

ethernal wrote:
There's a reason why no large airline has orders for 788s now (or really any airline... the open 788 order book is the who's-who of no-name and questionable buyers). 788s sold only because it was the only 787 for a period of time.

Wait, what? AA has an order for 25 788s that is being filled as we speak, to fill the role we are speaking of, 763 replacement. They ordered these despite being a legacy A332/A333 operator and despite being the owner of the largest Airbus fleet in the world.

That being said, I agree, it's over for the 787 for this round at DL. They have a nice A339/A350 fleet coming in that will serve them well.

Maybe a NMA/NLT/NSA/FSA/whatever will find a home at DL, but the emphasis is on maybe.

ethernal wrote:
The NMA-marked is continuously shrinking. And also ignores physics. There doesn't *have* to be a NMA aircraft. It's natural that there is a bit of a "gap" in the market due to single-aisle vs. widebody economics. Adding an extra aisle creates economic dead space (due to extra weight and drag). 7-abreast is the worst possible outcome, so then you need 8-abreast to make it start to make sense.. and then you end up with a stubby aircraft which is also bad for drag. Creative oval designs try to sort through this a bit but only puts a band-aid on the underlying issue.

As narrowbodies become increasingly capable, the market hole becomes very small to "target" - especially in context of the cost of a whole greenfield airframe. The 767 made sense in context of the engine and materials tech at the time. A 767-sized widebody aircraft doesn't necessarily make sense today.

The NMA proposal did not "ignore physics", it traded off some physical properties against others in a way that it thought made sense, and who knows, a follow on may make similar tradeoffs going forward.

Antarius wrote:
If it was already decided, then why would anyone be discussing it let alone the manufacturers? Obviously Airbus and Boeing understand basic physics.

:checkmark:

ethernal wrote:
Delays mean two things:
  • The next generation of engine tech is closer. The next generation of engine tech will probably enable an A321-sized airplane with 5000 nm of effective (not still air) range or an A322-sized airplane with 4000-4200 nm of effective range. This dramatically shrinks the market for NMA. Keep in mind the TATL niche that the 767 fills is a stagnant market. The growth is mostly in APAC, and those stats basically eliminate the need for a MoM aircraft.
  • The delays mean that airlines are going to have to solve for the MoM before their is a new aircraft available for purchase. There is no way a MoM aircraft is released before 2030. That means that 95%+ of passenger 767s will be retired. Now you're having to find a "fit" for it in the fleet mix rather than a simple replace that was part of the value proposition.
Between physics and economics, it's dead, Jim.

I'm not sure I'd say the next generation engine tech is getting closer. All three of the big three are bleeding cash since deferrals and cancellations are so common in the industry these days. RR has said they will finish the next round of testing for the UltraFan and then it will go on ice awaiting some future development program. They've also laid off lots of employees, as has Pratt. I think the big 3 are going through very lean times and will need to fatten up before they even consider deploying a disruptive next gen engine.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13906
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Tue Mar 02, 2021 7:41 pm

ethernal wrote:
In my opinion, Delta did misstep overextend when they bought the LR type with different engines. They bought it for a few select routes - LAX-SYD, ATL-JNB, etc - exactly the kind of thing you want to avoid as a large international network carrier.

The first purchase of the 777-200ERs were probably justifiable because of several key, profitable routes that were key to Delta's route network at the time (access to APAC and European partner/alliance gateways). The 777-200LRs were probably a mistake to add a few extra vanity routes not essential to Delta's route network.

You're viewing it through the lens of hindsight, and not by the current market assessment of the time.
That fallacious approach would lead to unrealistic critique opportunities of any given aspect of any airline's ops.

The 777s were acquired at a time when fuel was low, SkyTeam didn't yet exist, the N.American and European economies were stable, the Asian economy was quickly recovering from the '90s crisis, the limiting-factor of the 747's range (coupled with its debilitating size) was no longer a yoke preventing longhaul expansion by multi-hubbed carriers, and DL was still ordering exclusively from Boeing (despite having no contractual requirement to do so since 1997).

As such, the rush was for longhaul and ultra-longhaul equipment, and DL was severely behind its competitors; due to the well-discussed issues with DALPA that led to their 777s being nothing but LGW+CDG shuttles during their first 5yrs of service. It also led to them halting their 777 acquisition at only 8 units. By the time they were in a position to resume, Boeing was deemphasizing the 77E in favor of the 777LRs (77L + 77W) as the natural evolution to that family.

Several assessments showed that the 77W would be excessive to DL's needs, especially in the advent of the immunized SkyTeam TATL alliance; whereas the -LR would align with the carrier's desire to penetrate Africa (for which it had farrrrrr larger aspirations than the handful of destinations it flies to now), India, Australia, and Asia from the US east coast. You are mistaken in assuming that only a small amount of "vanity routes" was their intended acquisition purpose. And seeing as the only other viable alternative to do that, would be the heavier and shorter-ranged A345, for which DL had no interest; the obvious and natural choice was made for the 77L.

The carrier was neither aware nor willing to hedge on the fact that less than a decade later, there'd be 200seaters capable of economically flying 16hrs+. Or that there'd be a global financial crisis less than a year after launching ULHs. Or that there'd be a global pandemic that'd see the end of its 777 ops.

It did what it could, with its intended market, at the time. Of course that seems ridiculous, 20yrs later; just as it's equally ridiculous to judge those late '90s/early '00s decisions based on a 2021 perspective.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
ethernal
Posts: 482
Joined: Mon May 06, 2019 12:09 pm

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Tue Mar 02, 2021 8:58 pm

Revelation wrote:
ethernal wrote:
There's a reason why no large airline has orders for 788s now (or really any airline... the open 788 order book is the who's-who of no-name and questionable buyers). 788s sold only because it was the only 787 for a period of time.

Wait, what? AA has an order for 25 788s that is being filled as we speak, to fill the role we are speaking of, 763 replacement. They ordered these despite being a legacy A332/A333 operator and despite being the owner of the largest Airbus fleet in the world.

That being said, I agree, it's over for the 787 for this round at DL. They have a nice A339/A350 fleet coming in that will serve them well.

Maybe a NMA/NLT/NSA/FSA/whatever will find a home at DL, but the emphasis is on maybe.


AA does not have an order for 25 788s. Boeing Capital (or maybe now it's BOC Aviation) has an order for 25 788s to be leased to American for a 10 year term. AA primarily owns its widebody fleet (including almost all of the 789s with more on order) with the glaring exception of the 788. They don't want carry it on their books. One could argue it's a trivial difference, but it is an indication of what AA believes long-term about the 788's future - they wanted a bandaid for their 767 problem but don't want to carry the asset for long.

ethernal wrote:
Delays mean two things:
  • The next generation of engine tech is closer. The next generation of engine tech will probably enable an A321-sized airplane with 5000 nm of effective (not still air) range or an A322-sized airplane with 4000-4200 nm of effective range. This dramatically shrinks the market for NMA. Keep in mind the TATL niche that the 767 fills is a stagnant market. The growth is mostly in APAC, and those stats basically eliminate the need for a MoM aircraft.
  • The delays mean that airlines are going to have to solve for the MoM before their is a new aircraft available for purchase. There is no way a MoM aircraft is released before 2030. That means that 95%+ of passenger 767s will be retired. Now you're having to find a "fit" for it in the fleet mix rather than a simple replace that was part of the value proposition.
Between physics and economics, it's dead, Jim.

I'm not sure I'd say the next generation engine tech is getting closer. All three of the big three are bleeding cash since deferrals and cancellations are so common in the industry these days. RR has said they will finish the next round of testing for the UltraFan and then it will go on ice awaiting some future development program. They've also laid off lots of employees, as has Pratt. I think the big 3 are going through very lean times and will need to fatten up before they even consider deploying a disruptive next gen engine.


Fair enough on that point. I agree that engine tech is also getting delayed due to COVID.
 
VictorKilo
Posts: 267
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2006 7:39 am

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Wed Mar 03, 2021 12:04 am

Yes, Delta's Boeing 767 fleet is old and fully depreciated. But that's a feature, not a bug. Much like the M88/M90's on the narrow body side pre-covid, Delta can use them as variable capacity - fully using them during the peak of the TATL season, but park them during the winters when demand is low without having to service debt used to buy them. Yes, DL can lower operating costs by replacing them, but it would be more costly to buy a replacement new widebody and pay for the debt on it year round just to fly it for part of the year.

Pre-COVID, Delta flew a number of their 767 on transcontinental routes, mostly JFK-LAX, to provide a lay flat business class product on the busy and competitive route. Delta won't need the range of a 339 or a 787 to do this route, and it could end up replacing these 767s with a special configuration of 321Neo that provides a premium product, similar to AA.

Delta has had no issues operating aircraft that few others operate - the M90 fleet, 753 (which I think may be the only 753s with PW engines), 764, 717. And the 339 is also on that list. I wouldn't be surprised if further replacement of the 767 fleet was accelerated by an opportunistic deal for white tail/current or former AirAsiaX 339 frames, once the balance sheet for DL allows for it.
 
User avatar
DL757NYC
Posts: 330
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 6:07 am

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Wed Mar 03, 2021 12:54 am

wjcandee wrote:
TWA772LR wrote:
I honestly believe they get their info from here.


If they got their info from here, they would know that positing a one-for-one replacement of the retiring frame isn't how fleet planning works.

They would also know that DL has "unretired" some of the 767-300s that it planned to retire. One flew out of ILN last week, and more are coming.

And they would know that there was a good reason for DL to have sold its "most capable" 767s.

Plans change. Plans are flexible. DL didn't just say, "Okay, we're gonna retire all the 767s in 5 years," without at least a schematic plan for what it would fly (if anything) in their stead. The decision to do something five years out is filled with lots of assumptions, and lots of alternatives in the event that those assumptions prove faulty.

I think it's pretty-clear that they are now expecting things to recover faster than originally-planned, and stronger than originally-planned. And they're already making adjustments as a result of that, with similar adjusted contingencies.

Lots of nice interior photos, though.


The employees have been told to expect a busier summer than expected. They are trying to fill hub positions. I’ve noticed a significant uptick in passengers in the last 2 weeks.
 
wjcandee
Posts: 10376
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Wed Mar 03, 2021 1:11 am

DL757NYC wrote:
The employees have been told to expect a busier summer than expected. They are trying to fill hub positions. I’ve noticed a significant uptick in passengers in the last 2 weeks.


My own little unscientific survey supports exactly what you are saying, and booking seats for travel by my g/f this week does, too.
 
User avatar
DL_Mech
Posts: 2636
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2000 7:48 am

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Wed Mar 03, 2021 1:21 am

LAX772LR wrote:


As such, the rush was for longhaul and ultra-longhaul equipment, and DL was severely behind its competitors; due to the well-discussed issues with DALPA that led to their 777s being nothing but LGW+CDG shuttles during their first 5yrs of service. It also led to them halting their 777 acquisition at only 8 units. By the time they were in a position to resume, Boeing was deemphasizing the 77E in favor of the 777LRs (77L + 77W) as the natural evolution to that family
.


Also remember that ordering the 777 was offered as an olive branch to the pilots by new CEO Leo Mullin. IIRC, the first two airplanes went into service without a finalized contract with ALPA and the next five airplanes were delivered unpainted and stored in the desert. Leo then placed the entire fleet up for sale and used them for negotiations until a deal could be hammered out.



The ERs were ordered without any type of crew rest installed, so Pacific operation was going to be limited at best.
This plane is built to withstand anything... except a bad pilot.

Former AMT on A220,A310,A319/20/21,A330,A350,B707,B717,B727,B737,B747,B757,B767,B777,DC-9,DC-10,L-1011,
MD-80/90,MD-11
 
TTailedTiger
Posts: 2953
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:19 am

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Wed Mar 03, 2021 2:15 am

Oliver2020 wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:
Oliver2020 wrote:

Facts : Richard Anderson has acknowledged he could care less about nostalgia., as he is a business man not an aircraft or train enthusiast.
During the RFP for the 50-widebody aircraft wanted a proven technology aircraft.

Richard Anderson made a public statement as follows : Airbus really needs to STEP UP and reengine the A330
https://airwaysmag.com/industry/analysi ... d-747-400/

Richard Anderson also made the statement in public in reference to Boeing:
I can purchase a used 777 for 10 million dollars. Boeing responded that that wasn't the case.
Richard Anderson then made this statement publicly.
I was wrong about the price of a used 777 of 10 million dollars...we just signed a LOI(letter of intent) for a used 777 for
7.7 million dollars.

The difference is AIRBUS did step up and reengine the A330 and won the RFP fair and square.

Richard Anderson also purchased/acquired multiple aircraft for Delta that were McDonald Douglas and Boeing aircraft.
130-737-900ER......120..plus..10 put options....Airbus also placed 5-A321-200 put options on Delta as well 122.plus.5put options
Which is where the 127-A321-200-CEO number.
88-717-200/ex-MD95
49-MD-90-30 plus additional MD-90's for parts

267 total AC ----130 new Boeing AC plus 137-used Boeing/e-MD AC

In reference to the reason the the 10-737-700, 8-772ER, 10-772LR aircraft were due to cost cutting measures in reference
to the Covid19 pandemic. The above AC probably wouldn't have been retired in 2020 if it weren't for the pandemic.


The 777 that Delta bought for 7 million was unairworthy and only used for parts. Boeing was correct in their statement about not being able to get a 777 for 10 million.


Can you provide proof that the 777 was not air worthy( on this point to the best of my recollection Malaysia airlines was retiring the 772er with RR engines, and he saw an opportunity to purchase a cheap aircraft to prove to Boeing that it was possible to purchase a USED 777 below the 10million dollar mark).

Most likely the 777 which had RR engines ( the exact same engines as the 8-772ers in Deltas fleet at that time) , and other parts were worth the 7.7 million He used to purchase that 777. He was not obligated to admit that he wasn't going to refurbish that 777 and enter the AC into service. He only said that he signed a letter of intent to purchase that aircraft (which was a used 777).

Had Boeing provided the 18-787-8(aka the terrible teens) On time, within spec Delta wouldn't have been able to substitute other
aircraft on a dollar per dollar basis another statement from the worst CEO ever as he was concerned with making the company profitable not
buying the 787 to make Boeing happy.

IF Delta had accepted those 18-787-8 instead of substituting them for 130-737-900ER the18-788's would have been grounded twice.
Once due to the battery issue (approximately 2 months). NW ordered those 18-788 with RR engines which would have caused them to be
grounded again.


Please excuse any spelling mistakes or run on sentences as this is a long comment and difficult to correct as I'm using my iPhone.


A quick look on controller.com tells you everything you need to know. A 20 year old 737 goes for $15 million. You really think you're going to fly away a 777 for less than half of that? No. Not to mention Anderson's stunt was discussed indepth here. That 777 was not airworthy and was immediately scrapped for parts.
 
User avatar
Spacepope
Posts: 5212
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 1999 11:10 am

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Wed Mar 03, 2021 5:16 am

[quote="VictorKilo”]

Pre-COVID, Delta flew a number of their 767 on transcontinental routes, mostly JFK-LAX, to provide a lay flat business class product on the busy and competitive route. Delta won't need the range of a 339 or a 787 to do this route, and it could end up replacing these 767s with a special configuration of 321Neo that provides a premium product, similar to AA. it.[/quote]

In this case, the range argument is a red herring. Nobody says you shouldn’t fly a 738 from DEN to MCI because the 738 has too much range. This is capacity and product related, and with 6+ hour westbounds especially in winter, if an aircraft is good to use TATL, it’s good enough for transcon too.
The last of the famous international playboys
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 2215
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Wed Mar 03, 2021 5:19 am

TTailedTiger wrote:
Oliver2020 wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:

It would appear they may have made some bad fleet decisions. Why else would they get rid of 737's and 777's there were barely over ten years old? The 787 is a category of its own. It really has no competitor that can match its smaller size and economics. The A330 is an aging 1980's design and the A350 competes with the 77W/779. A 787 can efficiently operate JFK-LHR or LAX-SIN. Very versatile.


Facts : Richard Anderson has acknowledged he could care less about nostalgia., as he is a business man not an aircraft or train enthusiast.
During the RFP for the 50-widebody aircraft wanted a proven technology aircraft.

Richard Anderson made a public statement as follows : Airbus really needs to STEP UP and reengine the A330
https://airwaysmag.com/industry/analysi ... d-747-400/

Richard Anderson also made the statement in public in reference to Boeing:
I can purchase a used 777 for 10 million dollars. Boeing responded that that wasn't the case.
Richard Anderson then made this statement publicly.
I was wrong about the price of a used 777 of 10 million dollars...we just signed a LOI(letter of intent) for a used 777 for
7.7 million dollars.

The difference is AIRBUS did step up and reengine the A330 and won the RFP fair and square.

Richard Anderson also purchased/acquired multiple aircraft for Delta that were McDonald Douglas and Boeing aircraft.
130-737-900ER......120..plus..10 put options....Airbus also placed 5-A321-200 put options on Delta as well 122.plus.5put options
Which is where the 127-A321-200-CEO number.
88-717-200/ex-MD95
49-MD-90-30 plus additional MD-90's for parts

267 total AC ----130 new Boeing AC plus 137-used Boeing/e-MD AC

In reference to the reason the the 10-737-700, 8-772ER, 10-772LR aircraft were due to cost cutting measures in reference
to the Covid19 pandemic. The above AC probably wouldn't have been retired in 2020 if it weren't for the pandemic.


The 777 that Delta bought for 7 million was unairworthy and only used for parts. Boeing was correct in their statement about not being able to get a 777 for 10 million.

From memory, the plane was airworthy and was flown to the US for disassembly; it wasn't worth putting to DL standard though.
 
Oliver2020
Posts: 223
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2019 5:39 am

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 7

Wed Mar 03, 2021 5:56 am

TTailedTiger wrote:
Oliver2020 wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:

The 777 that Delta bought for 7 million was unairworthy and only used for parts. Boeing was correct in their statement about not being able to get a 777 for 10 million.


Can you provide proof that the 777 was not air worthy( on this point to the best of my recollection Malaysia airlines was retiring the 772er with RR engines, and he saw an opportunity to purchase a cheap aircraft to prove to Boeing that it was possible to purchase a USED 777 below the 10million dollar mark).

Most likely the 777 which had RR engines ( the exact same engines as the 8-772ers in Deltas fleet at that time) , and other parts were worth the 7.7 million He used to purchase that 777. He was not obligated to admit that he wasn't going to refurbish that 777 and enter the AC into service. He only said that he signed a letter of intent to purchase that aircraft (which was a used 777).

Had Boeing provided the 18-787-8(aka the terrible teens) On time, within spec Delta wouldn't have been able to substitute other
aircraft on a dollar per dollar basis another statement from the worst CEO ever as he was concerned with making the company profitable not
buying the 787 to make Boeing happy.

IF Delta had accepted those 18-787-8 instead of substituting them for 130-737-900ER the18-788's would have been grounded twice.
Once due to the battery issue (approximately 2 months). NW ordered those 18-788 with RR engines which would have caused them to be
grounded again.


Please excuse any spelling mistakes or run on sentences as this is a long comment and difficult to correct as I'm using my iPhone.


A quick look on controller.com tells you everything you need to know. A 20 year old 737 goes for $15 million. You really think you're going to fly away a 777 for less than half of that? No. Not to mention Anderson's stunt was discussed indepth here. That 777 was not airworthy and was immediately scrapped for parts.


With all do respect: it's exhausting trying to explain business vs fanboyism emotions. After this post I'm through for the evening.

So you are saying that the public comment (Airbus really needs to step up and reengine the A330) wasn't just as offensive to Airbus?
Airbus did reengine the A330 and Delta purchased 25-A330-900 aircraft to began replacing aging 767-300ER AC.

This left the Pacific side for replacement AC. 25-AC for replacement and expansion (25-787 vs 25-A359) sorry to cut this short but this is exhausting.
1. RR allowed Delta the MRO deal, which if I recall prior to Covid that alone was worth 2 billion dollars per year.
2. If I recall Delta was the launch customer for the 25-A339's which Anet user Coronado estimated the price of each AC at 83-93 million dollars each.
3. A350-900 Estimated price of 120-132 million dollars.
4. 25-A339 plus 25-A350 plus the RR MRO deal vs 50-787 at a price of 130-million dollars ( I will remind you that the 18-787-8's aka terrible teens).


He (Anet user Coronado)also estimated the purchase price as follows as he based on the Q2-2017 report:
51-B737-900ER--- 42-44M each
100-A321-200-----41-43M each
75-CS100----------24-28M each
25-A330-900------83-93M each
25-A350-900------120-132M each

The point I'm trying to make is Delta Airlines is a business not a charity. A CEO is obligated to the board directors and shareholders to spend the company's earnings as to the best of their ability.

Airbus won the RFP.
Off topic I preferred Boeing AC over Airbus until the Bombardier incident. Thankfully Airbus rescued that the Cseries as I think it's a great aircraft.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 10255
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Wed Mar 03, 2021 6:27 am

DL will be one of the big 797 launch customers. All is well.
 
Oliver2020
Posts: 223
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2019 5:39 am

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Wed Mar 03, 2021 8:35 am

TTailedTiger wrote:
Oliver2020 wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:

The 777 that Delta bought for 7 million was unairworthy and only used for parts. Boeing was correct in their statement about not being able to get a 777 for 10 million.


Can you provide proof that the 777 was not air worthy( on this point to the best of my recollection Malaysia airlines was retiring the 772er with RR engines, and he saw an opportunity to purchase a cheap aircraft to prove to Boeing that it was possible to purchase a USED 777 below the 10million dollar mark).

Most likely the 777 which had RR engines ( the exact same engines as the 8-772ers in Deltas fleet at that time) , and other parts were worth the 7.7 million He used to purchase that 777. He was not obligated to admit that he wasn't going to refurbish that 777 and enter the AC into service. He only said that he signed a letter of intent to purchase that aircraft (which was a used 777).

Had Boeing provided the 18-787-8(aka the terrible teens) On time, within spec Delta wouldn't have been able to substitute other
aircraft on a dollar per dollar basis another statement from the worst CEO ever as he was concerned with making the company profitable not
buying the 787 to make Boeing happy.

IF Delta had accepted those 18-787-8 instead of substituting them for 130-737-900ER the18-788's would have been grounded twice.
Once due to the battery issue (approximately 2 months). NW ordered those 18-788 with RR engines which would have caused them to be
grounded again.


Please excuse any spelling mistakes or run on sentences as this is a long comment and difficult to correct as I'm using my iPhone.


A quick look on controller.com tells you everything you need to know. A 20 year old 737 goes for $15 million. You really think you're going to fly away a 777 for less than half of that? No. Not to mention Anderson's stunt was discussed indepth here. That 777 was not airworthy and was immediately scrapped for parts.


First of all I never said it was airworthy I stated it was most likely purchased for parts. He wasn't obligated to state that the AC was purchased for 7.7 million dollars and we are gonna refurbish it and fly the AC. Are you admitting that a CEO should not negotiate for a good deal to benefit the company?

Regardless of the situation he was able to purchase a used 772er with RR engines for 7.7 million dollars.

After reviewing your source I could not find the information that the AC wasn't airworthy in the year 2014.
Thanks for not referencing Wikipedia which anyone can edit to fit their agenda.
 
TTailedTiger
Posts: 2953
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:19 am

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Wed Mar 03, 2021 8:39 am

Oliver2020 wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:
Oliver2020 wrote:

Can you provide proof that the 777 was not air worthy( on this point to the best of my recollection Malaysia airlines was retiring the 772er with RR engines, and he saw an opportunity to purchase a cheap aircraft to prove to Boeing that it was possible to purchase a USED 777 below the 10million dollar mark).

Most likely the 777 which had RR engines ( the exact same engines as the 8-772ers in Deltas fleet at that time) , and other parts were worth the 7.7 million He used to purchase that 777. He was not obligated to admit that he wasn't going to refurbish that 777 and enter the AC into service. He only said that he signed a letter of intent to purchase that aircraft (which was a used 777).

Had Boeing provided the 18-787-8(aka the terrible teens) On time, within spec Delta wouldn't have been able to substitute other
aircraft on a dollar per dollar basis another statement from the worst CEO ever as he was concerned with making the company profitable not
buying the 787 to make Boeing happy.

IF Delta had accepted those 18-787-8 instead of substituting them for 130-737-900ER the18-788's would have been grounded twice.
Once due to the battery issue (approximately 2 months). NW ordered those 18-788 with RR engines which would have caused them to be
grounded again.


Please excuse any spelling mistakes or run on sentences as this is a long comment and difficult to correct as I'm using my iPhone.


A quick look on controller.com tells you everything you need to know. A 20 year old 737 goes for $15 million. You really think you're going to fly away a 777 for less than half of that? No. Not to mention Anderson's stunt was discussed indepth here. That 777 was not airworthy and was immediately scrapped for parts.


First of all I never said it was airworthy I stated it was most likely purchased for parts. He wasn't obligated to state that the AC was purchased for 7.7 million dollars and we are gonna refurbish it and fly the AC. Are you admitting that a CEO should not negotiate for a good deal to benefit the company?

Regardless of the situation he was able to purchase a used 772er with RR engines for 7.7 million dollars.

After reviewing your source I could not find the information that the AC wasn't airworthy in the year 2014.
Thanks for not referencing Wikipedia which anyone can edit to fit their agenda.


All you have to do is look at Delta's own annual reports. And just because something may be true, it doesn't mean you are being honest. I could tell all my friends I bought a BMW 7 Series for $1500. But reality is it will never be driven again without significant investment.
 
Oliver2020
Posts: 223
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2019 5:39 am

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Wed Mar 03, 2021 9:01 am

TTailedTiger wrote:
Oliver2020 wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:

A quick look on controller.com tells you everything you need to know. A 20 year old 737 goes for $15 million. You really think you're going to fly away a 777 for less than half of that? No. Not to mention Anderson's stunt was discussed indepth here. That 777 was not airworthy and was immediately scrapped for parts.


First of all I never said it was airworthy I stated it was most likely purchased for parts. He wasn't obligated to state that the AC was purchased for 7.7 million dollars and we are gonna refurbish it and fly the AC. Are you admitting that a CEO should not negotiate for a good deal to benefit the company?

Regardless of the situation he was able to purchase a used 772er with RR engines for 7.7 million dollars.

After reviewing your source I could not find the information that the AC wasn't airworthy in the year 2014.
Thanks for not referencing Wikipedia which anyone can edit to fit their agenda.


All you have to do is look at Delta's own annual reports. And just because something may be true, it doesn't mean you are being honest. I could tell all my friends I bought a BMW 7 Series for $1500. But reality is it will never be driven again without significant investment.


If you bother review my post you will see that I review each annual report, mostly to review what aircraft Delta has purchased and what year the deliveries are planned. You might want to review those as well to understand that business decisions are made to benefit the company, and regardless of
personalities a good CEO will always do what's best for his company.

Now I do agree that it isn't right to deceive people,BUT in the business world (which is brutal and political) business is business. Just to clarify Boeings
isn't honest/ innocent either (reference Jedi mind tricks).
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15922
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Wed Mar 03, 2021 2:05 pm

DL_Mech wrote:
The ERs were ordered without any type of crew rest installed, so Pacific operation was going to be limited at best.


The 777 has the option of a removable crew rest installed in the cargo hold.
“Don't be a show-off. Never be too proud to turn back. There are old pilots and bold pilots, but no old, bold pilots.” E. Hamilton Lee, 1949
 
aviationjunky
Topic Author
Posts: 422
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2016 10:27 pm

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Wed Mar 03, 2021 4:44 pm

seahawk wrote:
DL will be one of the big 797 launch customers. All is well.


It looks as though they are shifting to an Airbus focused fleet, with over 200+ planes on order. I don't think the 797 will make much of a difference.
LAS is Life
 
Lootess
Posts: 610
Joined: Sun May 13, 2018 6:15 am

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Wed Mar 03, 2021 7:19 pm

jagraham wrote:
DL retired its seven newest, highest gross weight, most capable 767s. Which then got sold. The pattern is set.

As for replacements, I expect DL to go used, mostly. Some routes have already gone A333, but A333 or A339 is overkill. A338 is also overkill. And new planes cost too much. As far as used goes, TATL is an underuse of an A359 or a 787, but it would not surprise me to see DL pick up used 788s. But don't count out used A332s if DL can get enough of them. 2 or 3 years from now.


Delta will buy Used Used Used....widebodies everyday on airliners.net.

It hasn't happened in a long long time, likely near the time they bought a GOL 767 as part of the new relationship, not being in the market for it either. The same with LATAM, which the A359s were rejected.
 
N292UX
Posts: 676
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2017 7:08 pm

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Wed Mar 03, 2021 9:41 pm

DL has the A321neo on order at the moment. If I had to take a guess, they'll either add on or convert some of those to A321XLRs and some additional A330s (maybe the A338 but could also be the A332/333/339 being shifted around). This all assuming the Boeing MOM doesn't change much.

Plenty of the thinner 767 JFK routes can be done by the A321XLR and the ATL/DTW routes can be shifted to A330s presumably.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13906
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Wed Mar 03, 2021 10:37 pm

zeke wrote:
DL_Mech wrote:
The ERs were ordered without any type of crew rest installed, so Pacific operation was going to be limited at best.

The 777 has the option of a removable crew rest installed in the cargo hold.

That wasn't the point. Of course all involved were aware that modern crew rests were available, but DL wanted only to cede 160degree J seats for flight crew, and curtained Y seats for cabin, and the former weren't having it.

The airline wouldn't relent for a half decade: aircraft were delivered/stored without any rest outfitting, and spent 5yrs serving operating nowhere other than LGW and CDG (with infrequent AMS substitutes), until 2004, when overhead rests were installed, and the aircraft took over ATL-NRT from the MD11s.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
User avatar
DLHAM
Posts: 616
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2016 1:10 am

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Wed Mar 03, 2021 10:55 pm

I think that 767-300 routes will be upgraded to either 767-400 or A330-900. Thinner routes will see the 767-400, but I can imagine that some of these routes could be converted to seasonal because the 400 may be too big. If the 767-400 leaves earlier than we think we could see more canceled routes as there are quite a few routes that cannot handle an A330-900. Yes, operating cost may not be any higher than with the 767 and they could just fly these thin routes with the A330-900 and have 50 seats empty or filled with trash fares, but they wont do that. They will always look where they can maximize profits, and this will not be where the 50 empty seats or trash fares are. So these routes would go away ...

Regarding the XLR: Delta already has the XLR on order more or less, as they have the Neo on order. The XLR will be produced on the same production line, customers will be able to upgrade to the XLR up to a certain point before production. So Delta is in no hurry to "order" the XLR. I am sure that in the future they will operate at least a few (like 20 or more) XLRs. They could fly where the A330-900 is too large and the 767-400 is too large for a yearround flight, but of course open up new destinations as well.

Later on I am sure Delta will go big with the 797.
My Instagram Account: Instagram
 
User avatar
Crosswind
Posts: 2642
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2000 4:34 am

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Wed Mar 03, 2021 11:07 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
[S]pent 5yrs serving operating nowhere other than LGW and CDG (with infrequent AMS substitutes), until 2004, when overhead rests were installed, and the aircraft took over ATL-NRT from the MD11s.


That’s not true, the 777 was the regularly scheduled equipment on a lot of their high capacity Trans Atlantic routes of the era. Daily visits to DUB/SNN, MAN, FRA and AMS were the norm as well as LGW and CDG. Plus regularly scheduled Florida turns in between their Atlantic duties. Generally early 777 ops at Delta replaced TriStar or MD-11 service, in an era where the 767-400 was a domestic fleet.

Regards
CROSSWIND
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13906
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Thu Mar 04, 2021 1:44 am

Crosswind wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
[S]pent 5yrs serving operating nowhere other than LGW and CDG (with infrequent AMS substitutes), until 2004, when overhead rests were installed, and the aircraft took over ATL-NRT from the MD11s.


That’s not true, the 777 was the regularly scheduled equipment on a lot of their high capacity Trans Atlantic routes of the era. Daily visits to DUB/SNN, MAN, FRA and AMS were the norm as well

Meant yearround, which we didn't see with DUB/SNN (save for 2004) and AMS. Omitting FRA from that was a mistake though.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
User avatar
DL757NYC
Posts: 330
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 6:07 am

Re: Delta Has a Problem: The Boeing 767

Thu Mar 04, 2021 6:49 am

wjcandee wrote:
DL757NYC wrote:
The employees have been told to expect a busier summer than expected. They are trying to fill hub positions. I’ve noticed a significant uptick in passengers in the last 2 weeks.


My own little unscientific survey supports exactly what you are saying, and booking seats for travel by my g/f this week does, too.


I’ve flown every weekend for the last 3 months. Last week and this week the planes have been almost full. I land 6am before the airport was empty now there is moderate activity. In my humble opinion I feel there is going to be overwhelming demand. People have been stuck at home for a year. They will want to get away. This summer is going to be busy. Thanks to the vaccine.

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