DL A321s To Be Based At SLC?

1337Delta764 · Fri Oct 11, 2013 5:07 am

Apparently, DL ordered some A321s in addition to the 739ER due to the A321's for some routes that can use the A321's additional thrust. If I would guess, could the A321s be based at SLC? SLC is already an Airbus pilot base, and it seems like SLC would be a prime candidate for an A321 base due to its thrust advantage over the 739ER.

So, what does anyone here think?

dlramp4life · Fri Oct 11, 2013 5:29 am

To soon to tell but they will get around the system just like 739s will.

slcdeltarumd11 · Fri Oct 11, 2013 5:42 am

I think both will be all over the hubs. I think a lot will be 757 replacements.

I would think the 739 probably fine for takeoff totally full from slc to alt or JFK, no?

calpsafltskeds · Fri Oct 11, 2013 5:56 am

What's the issue with the 739ER? UA flies it DEN-BOS and DEN is 1,200 feet higher than SLC and they both have 12k runways. Both aircraft have the range for SLC to anywhere on the mainland. Would be surprised that DL would buy 321s because 739ERs have less thrust (they also weigh less).

aviatorcraig · Fri Oct 11, 2013 6:31 am

Not sure how "thrust advantage" is relevant here. Extra thrust MAY give you:

* Better (i.e. shorter) field performance
* Better hot and high performance
* Better climb angle / terrain clearance
* Better payload on a given route

I say "may" give you as there are so many other variables to factor in. Neither the 321 or the 739 have stellar field performance and both could probably use a bit more wing, but at most airports these aircraft will serve that won't be an issue.

What is it at SLC that requires extra performance?

seven3seven · Fri Oct 11, 2013 6:54 am

In the US specific planes are not based somewhere. The pilots who fly them have a specific base, but not the planes.

PHX787 · Fri Oct 11, 2013 7:36 am

Is it too far to Hawaii from SLC? Methinks it is....

How about Canadian expansion from SLC?

MIflyer12 · Fri Oct 11, 2013 10:54 am

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 6):
How about Canadian expansion from SLC?

Delta has ~700 mainline aircraft and ~500 in Delta Connection capable of flying anywhere in western Canada that Delta may want to go. It doesn't need a single A321 for that. With most of next summer's SLC-YYC/YVR operated by CR7 and CR9 (+ one daily 320), that use for A321s isn't apparent.

NorthstarBoy · Fri Oct 11, 2013 11:19 am

I think I missed something, since when did DL order the A321?

I'm assuming these planes will have CFM engines for commonality with the A319/A320s or will DL do what LH did, put IAEs on their A321s?

scbriml · Fri Oct 11, 2013 11:31 am

Quoting NorthstarBoy (Reply 8):
I think I missed something, since when did DL order the A321?

Just over a month ago, despite the percieved wisdom of many "experts" here. Do try to keep up at the back!

http://www.airbus.com/presscentre/pr...airbus-with-order-for-40-aircraft/

Quote:
Delta Air Lines has placed a firm order with Airbus for 30 A321ceo (current engine option) and 10 A330-300 aircraft. This order marks a strong return to Airbus since Delta’s last order some two decades ago.

Quoting NorthstarBoy (Reply 8):
I'm assuming these planes will have CFM engines for commonality with the A319/A320s

Yes, they have. Frankly, despite the sometimes over-played attraction of commonality, it's a little surprising since the V2500 is clearly the superior engine on the A321.

TrijetsRMissed · Sat Oct 12, 2013 6:27 am

I think a significant A321 presence at SLC is likely. I'm on record stating that the A321s will replace a portion of the older A320 fleet in 4-7 years time. Having a portion of the A321 capacity based out of SLC would be consistent with that.

Quoting seven3seven (Reply 5):
In the US specific planes are not based somewhere.The pilots who fly them have a specific base, but not the planes.

Not completely true. Where the plane spends the night is trivial.

Aircraft types are most definitely designated to be responsible for a percentage of departures at specific airline hubs; and thus become "based" within the greater network. This is by design. We can list several examples - the A320 at SLC being one of them...

bobnwa · Sat Oct 12, 2013 12:03 pm

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Thread starter):
and it seems like SLC would be a prime candidate for an A321 base due to its thrust advantage over the 739ER.

So, what does anyone here think?

Delta does not base aircraft in specific cities, however they do base pilots in specific cities,

FlyASAGuy2005 · Sat Oct 12, 2013 12:26 pm

Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 10):
Where the plane spends the night is trivial.

That is also not true. Many "last flights" is orchestrated for RON MTC. I'll dig up the document that shows how specific types get sent to certain cities for thisreason.

TrijetsRMissed · Sat Oct 12, 2013 9:07 pm

Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 12):
That is also not true. Many "last flights" is orchestrated for RON MTC. I'll dig up the document that shows how specific types get sent to certain cities for thisreason.

You're missing my point in responding to seven3seven, who believes pilots have a base and planes do not.

As it relates to specific "bases"... Do all MD-90s spend the night at MSP? Do all 752s and MD-88s overnight at ATL? At AA, are there any MD-80s that RON outside of DFW, ORD, etc? That is my point.

1337Delta764 · Sat Oct 12, 2013 9:53 pm

Quoting scbriml (Reply 9):
Yes, they have. Frankly, despite the sometimes over-played attraction of commonality, it's a little surprising since the V2500 is clearly the superior engine on the A321.

Yet they went with GE engines for the A333 order instead of P&W like their existing fleet. Rather than commonality, I think it had more to do with a financing deal between GE and DL, since GE is one of DL's financers. Also, there was some report of DL having a dispute with P&W, and remember that P&W is the majority shareholder of IAE.

Note that DL operates lots of MD-90s with IAE V2500 engines, therefore DL is already familiar with the V2500 and thus commonality couldn't have been the only reason for choosing CFM on the A321.

[Edited 2013-10-12 14:56:26]

coronado · Sun Oct 13, 2013 12:50 am

IMHO the best deployment of these 321 will be to replace 757 lift that is being used on the intermediate and shorter range routes, primarily the Florida runs from ATL as well as the other hub to ATL routes where a lot of 757's are used such as from MSP and DTW. A 757 is a heavy aircraft for hauling 200 pax on a 400-600 n. mile route. Fastest way to enhance the profitability of these routes is to deploy the relatively large main cabin, more fuel efficient, lighter weight 321, is in place of these 757's.

Flighty · Sun Oct 13, 2013 1:00 am

Certain cities have line maintenance, but other than that, aircraft are portable. They go wherever planning tells them to go. There is no "percentage of a fleet" as such because a fleet is one thing. The fleet circulates in a big circle.

Quoting bobnwa (Reply 11):
Delta does not base aircraft in specific cities, however they do base pilots in specific cities,

yes.

slcdeltarumd11 · Sun Oct 13, 2013 2:43 am

I guess to answer this the 321s are more likely in slc than the 739s? I think slc will keep 757s longer as others said the 321/739s make for great fuel savings on the short alt-Florida hops and other places better. Slc high altitude and hot temps will always be a factor but delta knows what works at slc better than anyone.

seven3seven · Sun Oct 13, 2013 3:00 am

Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 13):
You're missing my point in responding to seven3seven, who believes pilots have a base and planes do not.

Uhh, you're the one missing the point. I don't "believe" it, I know it.

TrijetsRMissed · Sun Oct 13, 2013 3:07 am

Quoting seven3seven (Reply 18):
Uhh, you're the one missing the point. I don't "believe" it, I know it.

Uhh? Pilot or not, you're wrong on so many levels. Do you think every aircraft is a random departure within the network? "Know it?" Give me a break.

DualQual · Sun Oct 13, 2013 3:22 am

Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 19):

Airplanes might be routed to cover routes or have MX complied with but they are not based anywhere. NxxxDL is not based in SLC. It might be specifically scheduled to transit there at a point to get a check done but it is not based there. By the same respect that same check can probably be done in ATL, DTW, LGA, CVG, etc so if it is more advantageous it will be rotated through any of those cities. SLC might have 20 departures of a specific type on a given day but its not always the same tails covering those flights. NxxxDL might not transit SLC for weeks.

MesaFlyGuy · Sun Oct 13, 2013 3:28 am

Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 19):

In all fairness to seven3seven, I have never seen DL base certain planes at certain airports (ie all of the plane's flightsare to/from one particular airport). I have seen some planes visit one airport more than another but DL really technically doesn't base planes at certain airports. They do have crew bases, but even they don't strictly stay flying to/from their base either. For example, I flew to MYR Memorial Day weekend and my crew on the MD-88 from ATL to MYR was a New York crew that had flown roundtrip from ATL to NAS and back before going to MYR.

Another example, I had an Atlanta crew work my RSW-JFK flight this past January, while thet trip down (JFK-RSW) was worked by a New York crew.

But back on topic, DL really doesn't have aircraft bases. Maintenance dictates where certain types visit more than others (for instance, Endeavor has a maintenance bases at FWA, so they fly more Endeavor. planes into FWA to rotate them through the maintenance cycle.

Hope this helps!

XFSUgimpLB41X · Sun Oct 13, 2013 4:03 am

Quoting seven3seven (Reply 18):

DL flexes aircraft focusing on different city pairings even daily to maximize profitability. A core aircraft may focus in a certain area, but others flex around.

deltal1011man · Sun Oct 13, 2013 7:18 am

Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 10):

Aircraft types are most definitely designated to be responsible for a percentage of departures at specific airline hubs; and thus become "based" within the greater network. This is by design. We can list several examples - the A320 at SLC being one of them...

but its very fluid

and ATL has more 32X flying than any Delta hub. SLC/MSP/DTW were all with in 5 flights a day of each other. (for S13)

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 14):
I think it had more to do with a financing deal between GE and DL, since GE is one of DL's financers.

what does this mean? you keep saying this but what are you talking about?

Airbus, Boeing, GE, P&W, CFM, Rolls, IAE, etc are all "financiers" for Delta and basically every other airline.

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 14):

Note that DL operates lots of MD-90s with IAE V2500 engines, therefore DL is already familiar with the V2500 and thus commonality couldn't have been the only reason for choosing CFM on the A321.

why? Commonality played a big part in it. (~130 V2500s in the fleet vs ~420 CFM56s with 200 more on order before the 321 order)

Viscount724 · Sun Oct 13, 2013 8:43 pm

Quoting aviatorcraig (Reply 4):

What is it at SLC that requires extra performance?

Combination of 4,227 ft. elevation and high summer temperatures. Average of 56 days per year with temperatures at least 90 °F (32.2 °C), 23 days at least 95 °F (35 °C), and 5 days of 100 °F (37.8 °C) or higher.

1337Delta764 · Sun Oct 13, 2013 11:15 pm

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 23):

why? Commonality played a big part in it. (~130 V2500s in the fleet vs ~420 CFM56s with 200 more on order before the 321 order

So if commonality was the main reason for DL's engine selection, why did DL go with GE instead of P&W for the A333s?

SLCUT2777 · Mon Oct 14, 2013 2:33 am

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 6):
How about Canadian expansion from SLC?

If that happens it will be a code share agrement with WS

deltal1011man · Mon Oct 14, 2013 3:08 am

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 25):

Because unlike the case with the CFM/IAE engine

The PW4000 would be leaving 4,000lbs of thrust off the table vs the CF6 and about 3000 vs the Trent 700.
In other words, CFM v IAE isnt to much of a big deal as they are both in the same ball park for performance (little edge to IAE) but in the PW4000s case it isn't even really comparable to the CF6 and T700

But I mean, you must all know all that right? You are all the all knowing on the matters. (Which is how you always can say that GE engines are so clearly better than any others)

And you didn't answer my question, yet again. What do you mean be GE is a Delta financier?

gigneil · Mon Oct 14, 2013 3:56 am

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 14):
Yet they went with GE engines for the A333 order instead of P&W like their existing fleet. Rather than commonality, I think it had more to do with a financing deal between GE and DL, since GE is one of DL's financers. Also, there was some report of DL having a dispute with P&W, and remember that P&W is the majority shareholder of IAE.

The PW isn't available at the MTOW option that Delta has selected, so, there's that.

NS

dl757md · Mon Oct 14, 2013 1:07 pm

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 25):
So if commonality was the main reason for DL's engine selection, why did DL go with GE instead of P&W for the A333s?

As already noted the PW isnt available for the MTOW option. Don't forget Delta has CF6 powered 763s and 764s already. There is no 4000 commonality advantage at least not from a maintenance standpoint. Delta works both the 4000 and CF6 in-house. As for pilot commonality, I don't see where there would be any more problem with different engine types on the A330 than there are on Delta's 767 fleet with which the different engine types is not an issue.

AngMoh · Mon Oct 14, 2013 1:34 pm

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 27):
And you didn't answer my question, yet again. What do you mean be GE is a Delta financier?

GE Capital is the most profitable arm of GE and they are effectively a bank/leasing company.

http://www.gecapital.com/en/

To get GE Capital financing, they often specify GE equipment as part of the deal increasing the profitability of GE as a group on the deal. But GE Engines does not provide any financing.

For example, you can see that the a lot of A320NEO CFM deals are driven by the GE capital financing package (e.g. AirAsia) and not the fact that they consider the the LEAP technically a better engine than the GTF, but commercially the LEAP is a better deal as it comes with a financing deal for the whole aircraft.

TrijetsRMissed · Fri Oct 18, 2013 3:06 am

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 23):
but its very fluid

and ATL has more 32X flying than any Delta hub. SLC/MSP/DTW were all with in 5 flights a day of each other. (for S13)

Of course, it may be fluid. But regardless, for aircraft fleets a base is a base.

To your example: As the world's busiest airport, with 70% mainline at DL, it's no surprise the ATL A320 flying is greater than SLC. The MD-90 is also greater than MSP... And MSP is universally recognized as an MD-90 base.

slcdeltarumd11 · Fri Oct 18, 2013 4:35 am

Given SLC high altitude on a hot day could the 737-900 delta has on order fly from say SLC-BOS or SLC-ANC with a totally full load and full of fuel? DEN runway is much longer and is less miles to the East Coast so its easy for them to fly a 737-900 to BOS.

deltal1011man · Fri Oct 18, 2013 5:02 am

Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 31):
The MD-90 is also greater than MSP... And MSP is universally recognized as an MD-90 base.

by who? 99.9% of the people i have seen say that is people who think MSP has more M90 flights. I have never heard it referred to by anyone higher up in Delta. MSP is a MD90, but its not "the" MD90 base because Delta doesn't have a single MD90 base.

Delta doesn't "base" airplanes anywhere. If they have a "base" its where the PSVs are done but even then, the 717s will be done in MSP and they wont even hard fly in and out of there. So are they really based there?

the 321s will likely see most of its flying from ATL. As will the 739. Why? well most of the 757 and 767 flying is ATL based.
Also its home to the largest amount of 320 flights.

Quoting angmoh (Reply 30):

I know all about GE. I am asking 1337 what they have specifically done to be a "financier" when other OEMs are not for Delta.

laca773 · Fri Oct 18, 2013 5:16 am

Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 12):
That is also not true. Many "last flights" is orchestrated for RON MTC. I'll dig up the document that shows how specific types get sent to certain cities for thisreason.

Perhaps there's some confusion here because AA has done something like this. AA's MIA station never had M80s based there. As well, there was a time, ORD was a M80 base and very few 738s were flown through there. Of course that has since changed, except MIA still doesn't see M80s.
As far as I'm aware, DL has never done anything this specific regarding certain fleet types being based out of certain hubs.
Is it true DL moved the majority of the M90s flown from SLC to MSP due to better performance for the routes based on range economics. They found the A319/A320s were much more efficient for the routes out of SLC based on distance when compared to the M90s some of those routes previously?

slcdeltarumd11 · Fri Oct 18, 2013 5:31 am

Quoting laca773 (Reply 34):
Is it true DL moved the majority of the M90s flown from SLC to MSP due to better performance for the routes based on range economics. They found the A319/A320s were much more efficient for the routes out of SLC based on distance when compared to the M90s some of those routes previously?

The MD-90s have the range to hit everything in the lower 48 from MSP so it makes sense to swap.

The 319/320 made sense to move to SLC since they can fly east coast-slc. They can do the normal East coast-slc-west coast rotation of the SLC hub. The MD90s were good at high altitude for like california, vegas, denver etc but just didn't have the range on takeoff of slc to fly to the east so they were not as easy to rotate. The swap really made sense since the MD90s can hit everything from MSP making it a great plane.

bobnwa · Fri Oct 18, 2013 11:07 am

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 33):
by who? 99.9% of the people i have seen say that is people who think MSP has more M90 flights. I have never heard it referred to by anyone higher up in Delta. MSP is a MD90, but its not "the" MD90 base because Delta doesn't have a single MD90 base.

Delta doesn't "base" airplanes anywhere. If they have a "base" its where the PSVs are done but even then, the 717s will be done in MSP and they wont even hard fly in and out of there. So are they really based there?

Surprisingly, I agree with you totally.

yyz717 · Fri Oct 18, 2013 4:06 pm

Quoting Coronado (Reply 15):
A 757 is a heavy aircraft for hauling 200 pax on a 400-600 n. mile route. Fastest way to enhance the profitability of these routes is to deploy the relatively large main cabin, more fuel efficient, lighter weight 321, is in place of these 757's.

Not necessarily. The greater fuel efficiency of the 321 suggests it should be used on longer hauls enabling greater utilization (in terms of flight hours, not flights), leaving the less efficient 752's on the shorter hauls where flight hours are less.

seven3seven · Fri Oct 18, 2013 4:12 pm

Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 31):
And MSP is universally recognized as an MD-90 base.

I dont recognize it. So its not universal. Sorry you're just wrong.

e38 · Sat Oct 19, 2013 3:22 am

Quoting seven3seven (Reply 38), I dont recognize it. So its not universal. Sorry you're just wrong."

Gee, David Barrett, chill, dude. The comment made by TrijetsRMissed (Reply 31), "MSP is universally recognized as an MD-90 base," was not intended to be taken literally! The basic implication of the statement is that on a given day, Delta moves a LOT of MD-90s through MSP, and this is true. Folks who have spent a day or so plane spotting at MSP, particularly at Terminal 1, know that a large number of Delta MD-90s transit MSP every day.

For the MSP-based MD-88/MD-90 crews (the category is MSP M88), the majority of the trips begin on the first day outbound and end on the last day of the trip inbound on an MD-90.

e38

deltal1011man · Sat Oct 19, 2013 4:28 am

Quoting e38 (Reply 39):

And as I said, Atlanta has most 90 flights than MSP.
So you can spot all you want, but MSP is no more of a M90 base than ATL, or any other hub that sees 90 flying

Quoting bobnwa (Reply 36):

Hell has frozen

One day we might just be able to raise a beer together

Maybe being a big key word

mayor · Sat Oct 19, 2013 9:16 pm

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 26):
Quoting PHX787 (Reply 6):
How about Canadian expansion from SLC?

If that happens it will be a code share agrement with WS

Why not.......we used to and seemed that we were very successful with 727s and 757s on the routes to YEG & YYC.

BTW, we used to send alot of cargo northbound on those trips, very little came south bound out of Canada.

[Edited 2013-10-19 14:22:37]

TrijetsRMissed · Sun Oct 20, 2013 2:24 am

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 33):
MSP is a MD90, but its not "the" MD90 base because Delta doesn't have a single MD90 base.
Delta doesn't "base" airplanes anywhere.

You're a company guy, right? So it surprises me you would challenge the MSP & MD-90 correlation. And to be clear, I did not say "THE" MD-90 base, as if trumping all other hubs. Rather a base for the MD-90. Different implications.

Before falling back on the semantics of "base", keep it in context with my original quote on general fleet strategy.

Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 10):
Aircraft types are most definitely designated to be responsible for a percentage of departures at specific airline hubs; and thus become "based" within the greater network. This is by design. We can list several examples - the A320 at SLC being one of them...

Quoting e38 (Reply 39):
The basic implication of the statement is that on a given day, Delta moves a LOT of MD-90s through MSP, and this is true.

Thank you!

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 33):
Why? well most of the 757 and 767 flying is ATL based.

Really? I thought "Delta doesn't "base" airplanes anywhere."

Quoting laca773 (Reply 34):
As far as I'm aware, DL has never done anything this specific regarding certain fleet types being based out of certain hubs.

That's not true, even if your definition is 100% of all flying. For example, for a period of time in the earlier 2000's the MD-90 was exclusively operated out of SLC. Before that, it was DFW.

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 40):
And as I said, Atlanta has most 90 flights than MSP.

Halfway there. You had the A320; I had the MD-90 in my reply.

In regards to ATL, you're remiss in dismissing the fact that: a) ATL is the world's busiest airport and b) 70% of DL is mainline. By raw numbers, the ATL argument is skewed.

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 37):
The greater fuel efficiency of the 321 suggests it should be used on longer hauls enabling greater utilization (in terms of flight hours, not flights),

I can see the A321 doing a lot of SLC - East coast flying.

MesaFlyGuy · Sun Oct 20, 2013 2:47 am

Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 42):
I can see the A321 doing a lot of SLC - East coast flying

I'll wager to bet that the first a321 routes from SLC will be JFK, DCA, and ATL, all route that currently have domestic 757s running now and can benefit from the fuel efficiency on the longer flights.

deltal1011man · Sun Oct 20, 2013 4:30 am

Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 42):

You're a company guy, right? So it surprises me you would challenge the MSP & MD-90 correlation. And to be clear, I did not say "THE" MD-90 base, as if trumping all other hubs. Rather a base for the MD-90. Different implications.

A base at Delta is a place that has a pilot and/or FA base. That is a base. MSP happens to have a M88 base.
But the M88s, M90s, 737s, A330s, 757, 747 etc aren't based there. The employees are based there, the fleet moves around.

For a little while Delta has a NYC 777 base but no NYC 777 flying. (off and on)

Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 42):

Really? I thought "Delta doesn't "base" airplanes anywhere."

they don't. When i say most of the 757 flying is ATL based I mean that the 757, 767 domestic and the 88s do the majority of their flying out of Atlanta. They are not "based" in Atlanta though. (but do have employee bases)

Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 42):

That's not true, even if your definition is 100% of all flying. For example, for a period of time in the earlier 2000's the MD-90 was exclusively operated out of SLC. Before that, it was DFW.

The 90s weren't SLC or Dallas exclusive. The bulk of the flying was SLC/DFW but they also had turns in and out of ATL. Mostly due to (at the time) HMVs being done on the fleet in Atlanta. ( I do not know where they lower level checks were done on the fleet at the time, maybe DWH?)

Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 42):
In regards to ATL, you're remiss in dismissing the fact that:

I'm no dismissing it at all. Atlanta see the most flights on every fleet type expect the 777/744. A huge part of that is because its so mainline heavy and its a 1,000 a day hub. Your 100% right, but that doesn't change anything about what i said.

roseflyer · Sun Oct 20, 2013 6:48 am

I don't see the A321 having any significant advantage over the 739ER out of SLC due to thrust. Both should be able to make it anywhere within the 48 states with a full passenger load. Only abnormal amounts of cargo or significant extra fuel would cause a problem.

I haven't seen any charts that show the A321 having more range than a 739ER with a typical passenger load. Has anyone seen one? I was under the impression 737ngs usually had similar or a bit more range.

slcdeltarumd11 · Sun Oct 20, 2013 6:55 am

Quoting roseflyer (Reply 45):
I haven't seen any charts that show the A321 having more range than a 739ER with a typical passenger load. Has anyone seen one? I was under the impression 737ngs usually had similar or a bit more range.

I havn't seen anything on that either. I thought the rumor was that the 737-900s were runway hogs on take off and SLC high altitude and hot temperate risk certainly wont help at all.

laca773 · Sun Oct 20, 2013 7:27 am

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 35):
The MD-90s have the range to hit everything in the lower 48 from MSP so it makes sense to swap.

The 319/320 made sense to move to SLC since they can fly east coast-slc. They can do the normal East coast-slc-west coast rotation of the SLC hub. The MD90s were good at high altitude for like california, vegas, denver etc but just didn't have the range on takeoff of slc to fly to the east so they were not as easy to rotate. The swap really made sense since the MD90s can hit everything from MSP making it a great plane.

Thanks for the information, slcdeltarumd11. I appreciate it. My thinking was pretty accurate.

deltal1011man · Sun Oct 20, 2013 8:21 am

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 46):

Due to the the fact that Delta can(and likely will) get 33K thrust engines for the 321s vs 28Ks for the 739s, they should have a bit better hot and high performance.

but the 757 would still simply smoke both aircraft.

roseflyer · Sun Oct 20, 2013 6:50 pm

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 46):
I havn't seen anything on that either. I thought the rumor was that the 737-900s were runway hogs on take off and SLC high altitude and hot temperate risk certainly wont help at all.

Yes at 4000ft, the 900Er may need 10,000ft of runway to get 170,000 lbs off the ground. It can't depart at MTOW but 170,000 lbs should be enough for deltas seat configuration and since no routes exceed 2000 miles.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net