DL Widebody Strategy

EddieDude · Fri Oct 09, 2015 7:23 pm

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 88):
This strikes me as absurd. It's the same sort of wishful Boeing-fanboy rumor that spread around the time of the DL-NW merger, when you had posters on this site saying that DL was going to sell off all its A320s and A330s and announce a multibillion-dollar order for new 737s and 787s. Delta just ordered the A350s after an extensive RFP process with lots of analysis, and the A350s are the perfect product for the airline's Pacific network.

The rumor of used 77Es is not as absurd, although I'd still bet against it. But they would be gap-fillers to provide cheap flex long-haul capacity while waiting for the next order for large widebodies, which could be additional A350s or 787-10s.

I think you have put it very eloquently. I cannot conceive DL would cancel the A359 order. The A359s are pivotal for their Asia needs/strategy. I suppose we will also see them flying to SYD, JNB, DXB.

I agree with you too that DL might want to procure from some other carrier or from a lessor some old 77Es. This would not surprise me, but this would be to address some shorter-term needs as you well said.

Quoting northwestEWR (Reply 98):
They're too big and too heavy for the vast majority of Delta's 763ER missions. They need an airplane that carries 200-230 people. Right now, the only option is the 788 since the A330/A350 will be close to 300 pax.

So, just to summarize, the A339NEOs will be mostly used for European routes, while the A359s will be used for Asian routes, right? I suppose we are all waiting to find out what DL is planning for the thinner European routes and for South American flights. It will be interesting to see whether DL goes for 788s, for A338NEOs, for A332s with the higher MTOW, or what. I would not be surprised to see DL keep the ex-NW A332s, together with the 764ERs and the newer 763ERs for a long time to serve these markets. A new order might not come as soon as we would all hope for.

compensateme · Fri Oct 09, 2015 7:30 pm

Quoting Polot (Reply 99):
Its not either/or, Boeing can do both. Suspend deferral penalties to prevent an order cancellation and "reward" DL for freeing up slots, and give them credit on other jets to compensate for delays in aircraft that DL/NW should have had in 2010.

Neither one of us knows the full details about the compensation that DL received and what they were entitled to per their original contract.

Early purchase incentives are just that. DL insiders have confirmed that DL received compensation (again, credits toward the 739) for the 787. No, we don't know for sure, but it's not rational that DL got to defer the aircraft an average of 12 years for little/no penalty, receive millions in credits toward the 739, and keep its early buyer incentives.

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 97):
"Delta hates the 787 and won't ever buy one" makes as little sense as "Delta will cancel all its A350s." It's just a game of numbers.

I don't believe DL "hates" the 787, but I do believe DL preferred the Airbus options over it, which has been my point to refute the plethora of 'DL only ordered Airbus because of delivery slot availability. Sure, slot availability may have been a part of it -- but the bottom line could've been that DL actually liked the Airbus product more.

[Edited 2015-10-09 12:36:59]

northwestEWR · Fri Oct 09, 2015 7:37 pm

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 101):
I don't believe DL "hates" the 787, but I do believe DL preferred the Airbus options over it, which has been my point to refute the plethora of 'DL only ordered Airbus because of delivery slot availability.'

Slot availability and more importantly, PRICING. Airbus needed Delta for the A330NEO and A350 projects way more than Boeing did on the 787 and as such, the price war favored Airbus.

compensateme · Fri Oct 09, 2015 7:43 pm

Quoting northwestEWR (Reply 102):

Slot availability and more importantly, PRICING. Airbus needed Delta for the A330NEO and A350 projects way more than Boeing did on the 787 and as such, the price war favored Airbus.

There's no evidence that Airbus offered significantly lower pricing than Boeing, and given the breadth of the package, I think it's ignorant to think Boeing could've match (or come close to matching) the pricing.

bobnwa · Fri Oct 09, 2015 7:50 pm

Quoting ThirtyWest (Reply 85):
Just circling back to the rumor involving DAL acquiring used 772ERs (which I've heard now from a number of sources) --

I would wager that all the "number of sources" have the same DNA. No one with any horsepower at Delta has made any comment concerning used 772ERs. That is just Anet speak from wanna be authorities.

OA412 · Fri Oct 09, 2015 7:52 pm

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 101):
but the bottom line could've been that DL actually liked the Airbus product more.

Not on this website. Airlines only choose Airbus because the planes were free or Airbus throws in some other incentive. It's the only reason airlines choose Airbus over the obviously superior Boeing option.

Quoting northwestEWR (Reply 102):
Airbus needed Delta for the A330NEO and A350 projects way more than Boeing did on the 787 and as such, the price war favored Airbus.

Why? DL made no secret of the fact that it wanted Airbus to build the A330NEO. That order was always going to happen, even if DL went 789 for the Asia routes. With respect to the A350, why did Airbus "need" DL. They already had orders from the other big 3 US airlines, plus a plethora of orders from major airlines all over the world. They didn't "need" an order from Delta at all.

FSDan · Fri Oct 09, 2015 8:01 pm

Quoting northwestEWR (Reply 91):
That sounds realistic. I didn't think the new TLV was daily? So maybe they can do it with one frame.

It looks like the currently planned schedule has departures from JFK on Mo/Tu/Th/Fr at 4pm with arrivals back to JFK on Tu/We/Fr/Sa at 4:49pm, so unless that changes it can't be done with one frame.

The summer schedule currently shows a JFK-AMS that departs JFK at 7:50pm and arrives at AMS at 9:50am, and an AMS-JFK that leaves AMS at 11:35am and arrives at JFK at 1:55pm, so with some slight tweaks that seems like it could be a good candidate to pair the early JFK-TLV flight with.

scbriml · Fri Oct 09, 2015 8:07 pm

Quoting northwestEWR (Reply 91):
And then they'd have nothing to replace the 50+ 767s that will need replacing come 2020.

Er, that's just the job for A330neos and possibly even more A350s.

Quoting northwestEWR (Reply 98):
They're too big and too heavy for the vast majority of Delta's 763ER missions. They need an airplane that carries 200-230 people. Right now, the only option is the 788 since the A330/A350 will be close to 300 pax.

One would have to ask why, DL has repeatedly bought A330s (ceo and neo) when they could have purchased more 767s? I don't think they see an issue replacing 767s with A330s.

Polot · Fri Oct 09, 2015 8:12 pm

Quoting scbriml (Reply 107):
One would have to ask why, DL has repeatedly bought A330s (ceo and neo) when they could have purchased more 767s? I don't think they see an issue replacing 767s with A330s.

One would have to ask why that question is relevant when DL has yet to replace any 767s with A330s? I don't think DL has gotten rid of any international 767s yet.

DL has also never selected the A330 in an RFP that included the 767, because why would DL order the 767 in 2013 and 2014?

You are making quite a few leaps in logic there. The most you can say is that DL is comfortable replacing some of their 767s with A330s because A) DL doesn't have enough A330s on order to replace the entire 767 fleet, and B) every A330 DL has ordered seats 70-80 more passengers than their 763s. Delta may feel a small 788 fleet (again, still technically on order!) is necessary in conjunction with the A339neo to replace the 767s.

[Edited 2015-10-09 13:20:32]

[Edited 2015-10-09 13:22:06]

panamair · Fri Oct 09, 2015 8:19 pm

Quoting scbriml (Reply 107):
Quoting northwestEWR (Reply 91):
And then they'd have nothing to replace the 50+ 767s that will need replacing come 2020.

Er, that's just the job for A330neos and possibly even more A350s.

Both way too big. The 58 763ERs today carry between 208 and 226 pax, whereas the A339s ordered will seat 293 (same as the current A333s) and the A359s will seat 321 pax. Delta simply has too many routes that will never fill the A333 or A339 except maybe a few weeks or days a year!

northwestEWR · Fri Oct 09, 2015 8:22 pm

Quoting Polot (Reply 108):
One would have to ask why that question is relevant when DL has yet to replace any 767s with A330s? I don't think DL has gotten rid of any international 767s yet.

DL has also never selected the A330 in an RFP that included the 767, because why would DL order the 767 in 2013 and 2014?

The 767s have time left on the clock. They're waiting. The A330s replaced the Northwest DC-10s and are now being used for expansion. Routes are getting longer and especially in the Pacific, require two frames to be operated. There is no doubt that some A330s will end up on 767 routes but the majority of the 763ER missions are too small for the A330.

Quoting panamair (Reply 109):
Both way too big. The 58 763ERs today carry between 208 and 226 pax, whereas the A339s ordered will seat 293 (same as the current A333s) and the A359s will seat 321 pax. Delta simply has too many routes that will never fill the A333 or A339 except maybe a few weeks or days a year!

I don't understand why people can't grasp that concept. Delta is not done with widebody orders and the 787 is the only option in that size category. They will live happily next to the larger A330NEO and A350. Just like at United.

seabosdca · Fri Oct 09, 2015 9:13 pm

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 103):
There's no evidence that Airbus offered significantly lower pricing than Boeing

Sure there is, at least for the 339 vs. 789 part of the order... the existence of the order itself.

At the same price, the 339's only possible advantages over the 789 could be cheaper maintenance in the short term (given Delta TechOps's existing A330 expertise) and easier integration into Delta's fleet. Those aren't trivial things, but they're also not the biggest factors. The 789 wins on passenger capacity (assuming 9Y 787 vs. 8Y A330), cargo capacity, empty weight, fuel consumption, range, and trip cost, and loses by only the narrowest amount on max payload.

But move the prices just a little bit and the advantage could flip, especially for a carrier that doesn't need the ultimate in range or cargo capacity (that is, DL across the Atlantic).

Note that this analysis is only for the 339; the 359 stands on its own competing with the 789 and, I'm sure, didn't sell at a discount compared to Boeing's proposed 789 price. And the 359 is a more attractive aircraft than the 789 on some of the more extreme long-haul routes DL flies.

[Edited 2015-10-09 14:15:54]

northwestEWR · Fri Oct 09, 2015 9:30 pm

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 111):
Sure there is, at least for the 339 vs. 789 part of the order... the existence of the order itself.

At the same price, the 339's only possible advantages over the 789 could be cheaper maintenance in the short term (given Delta TechOps's existing A330 expertise) and easier integration into Delta's fleet. Those aren't trivial things, but they're also not the biggest factors. The 789 wins on passenger capacity (assuming 9Y 787 vs. 8Y A330), cargo capacity, empty weight, fuel consumption, range, and trip cost, and loses by only the narrowest amount on max payload.

But move the prices just a little bit and the advantage could flip, especially for a carrier that doesn't need the ultimate in range or cargo capacity (that is, DL across the Atlantic).

And so Airbus offered Delta a deal and they took it. We all know how price sensitive Delta is and this order came down to dollars and cents.

OA412 · Fri Oct 09, 2015 10:03 pm

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 111):
Sure there is, at least for the 339 vs. 789 part of the order... the existence of the order itself.

??? The competition was not 339 v. 789. All accounts suggest it was 339 and 359 v. 789. The 359 won over the 789. The 339 was always on the cards.

klkla · Fri Oct 09, 2015 10:06 pm

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 92):
deferral penalties likely wiped out whatever early incentives NW received.

There were no deferral penalties. DL let Boeing off the hook by deferring the orders. You seem to forget that it was Boeing that was unable to deliver the aircraft on time. DL did not have any problem paying for the aircraft and would have taken them if Boeing could deliver what they promised. The order is still on the books.

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 101):
t. DL insiders have confirmed that DL received compensation (again, credits toward the 739) for the 787.

Source?

seabosdca · Fri Oct 09, 2015 10:16 pm

Quoting OA412 (Reply 113):
All accounts suggest it was 339 and 359 v. 789. The 359 won over the 789. The 339 was always on the cards.

That is not what Anderson said at one point. He said it would be all-or-nothing for one vendor. Airbus offered 339 + 359. Boeing apparently offered 789 + top-up/interim 77L.

flyabr · Fri Oct 09, 2015 10:37 pm

Quoting panamair (Reply 109):
Both way too big. The 58 763ERs today carry between 208 and 226 pax, whereas the A339s ordered will seat 293 (same as the current A333s) and the A359s will seat 321 pax. Delta simply has too many routes that will never fill the A333 or A339 except maybe a few weeks or days a year!

I'll still place my cards on an eventual A338 order vs the 788. With current CEO and forthcoming 242T and NEO A330s in the fleet, the A338 has a much better chance vs the 788, even if it is a bit of an upgauge in capacity over the 763ER. Nothing I've seen/read (other than that much delayed NW order) suggests DL is even considering the 788. So while some of you rely on your emotions to predict future WB orders, I'll stay grounded with what makes sense based on recent DL actions!

flyabr · Fri Oct 09, 2015 10:44 pm

Also, since Airbus gives away planes to get 'em sold...I suspect that DL could very well pick up some end of the line A332CEOs for next to nothing to replace a few of those 763ERs!

northwestEWR · Fri Oct 09, 2015 10:57 pm

Quoting flyabr (Reply 116):
I'll still place my cards on an eventual A338 order vs the 788. With current CEO and forthcoming 242T and NEO A330s in the fleet, the A338 has a much better chance vs the 788, even if it is a bit of an upgauge in capacity over the 763ER. Nothing I've seen/read (other than that much delayed NW order) suggests DL is even considering the 788. So while some of you rely on your emotions to predict future WB orders, I'll stay grounded with what makes sense based on recent DL actions!

Agree to disagree. I work for Delta and from what I hear at work, we'll still need something to replace the 767 starting around 2020. The A330NEO is too large so we'll need something smaller and right now, we have orders for 18 787-8s that haven't been cancelled for further deferred. There's a future for the 787 at Delta, it just wasn't ordered in the last RFP which, btw, wasn't for the 767 size market but the ~300 seat category.

Quoting flyabr (Reply 117):
Also, since Airbus gives away planes to get 'em sold...I suspect that DL could very well pick up some end of the line A332CEOs for next to nothing to replace a few of those 763ERs!

They're still too big. Even for cheap.

seabosdca · Fri Oct 09, 2015 11:04 pm

Quoting flyabr (Reply 116):
Nothing I've seen/read (other than that much delayed NW order) suggests DL is even considering the 788.

That sounds a bit funny if we rephrase it as "Nothing suggests DL is even considering the 788, except their firm, reconfirmed order for 18 788s."

flyabr · Fri Oct 09, 2015 11:13 pm

Quoting northwestEWR (Reply 118):
They're still too big. Even for cheap.

Are they? The capacity jump from the 763ER to the A332 is only about 15 to 25 butts...depending upon the version of 763ER being compared.

flyabr · Fri Oct 09, 2015 11:15 pm

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 119):
That sounds a bit funny if we rephrase it as "Nothing suggests DL is even considering the 788, except their firm, reconfirmed order for 18 788s.

What's even funnier is the fact that they just ordered 50 WB, and not a single one was a 787...despite that floating NW order...

compensateme · Fri Oct 09, 2015 11:24 pm

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 111):
Sure there is, at least for the 339 vs. 789 part of the order... the existence of the order itself.

Sorry, but you're naive if you believe that in a package, multibillion dollar order, that Boeing was unable to match Airbus' price.

Quoting klkla (Reply 114):
Source?

It's well accepted within the analyst community that DL preferred the 321 and was about to place a large order for it before Boeing offered it millions in credits from the 787 program toward the purchase of 739. There are two users within these forums that work within DL's operations that have confirmed it on here (one of whom I worked with and knew quite well).

Quoting klkla (Reply 114):
There were no deferral penalties. DL let Boeing off the hook by deferring the orders. You seem to forget that it was Boeing that was unable to deliver the aircraft on time. DL did not have any problem paying for the aircraft and would have taken them if Boeing could deliver what they promised. The order is still on the books.

Do you have a source for anything you've written? Throughout history there have been oodles of orders that have seen significant deferrals and it was questionable the operator would ever take delivery of them.

OA412 · Fri Oct 09, 2015 11:37 pm

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 122):
Sorry, but you're naive if you believe that in a package, multibillion dollar order, that Boeing was unable to match Airbus' price.

I can't begin to imagine that Boeing wouldn't match or exceed Airbus' price since it meant the A339 losing out to the 789, which would absolutely do damage to the A330neo case. I'm not sure why people are unwilling to accept that the A339/A359 was simply the better choice for DL.

flyabr · Fri Oct 09, 2015 11:46 pm

Quoting OA412 (Reply 123):
I can't begin to imagine that Boeing wouldn't match or exceed Airbus' price since it meant the A339 losing out to the 789, which would absolutely do damage to the A330neo case. I'm not sure why people are unwilling to accept that the A339/A359 was simply the better choice for DL.

It appears as far as DL was concerned, the competition was the 789 vs A359 for TPAC ops. The A330NEO for TATL ops really didn't have any competition excepting perhaps a very good price on CEO A330s. Gnerally speaking DL management seems to consider the 788/789/A359 as aircraft where the aircraft's inherent capability is wasted and not needed on TATL missions.

klkla · Sat Oct 10, 2015 1:08 am

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 122):
It's well accepted within the analyst community that DL preferred the 321 and was about to place a large order for it before Boeing offered it millions in credits from the 787 program toward the purchase of 739.

That's not a source. That's speculation.

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 122):
Do you have a source for anything you've written? Throughout history there have been oodles of orders that have seen significant deferrals and it was questionable the operator would ever take delivery of them.

It's common sense. Delta could have held Boeing to it's delivery commitment and Boeing would have had to pay penalties because there was no possible way to do. They instead reaffirmed the order and delayed deliveries. There was no incentive for Delta to do this therefore no reason to give anything up in the negotiations.

PGNCS · Sat Oct 10, 2015 1:28 am

Quoting klkla (Reply 125):
Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 122):It's well accepted within the analyst community that DL preferred the 321 and was about to place a large order for it before Boeing offered it millions in credits from the 787 program toward the purchase of 739.That's not a source. That's speculation.

At least cite all of his relevant post, please, which was:

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 122):
It's well accepted within the analyst community that DL preferred the 321 and was about to place a large order for it before Boeing offered it millions in credits from the 787 program toward the purchase of 739. There are two users within these forums that work within DL's operations that have confirmed it on here (one of whom I worked with and knew quite well).

That's as close as a source as you will you get here as anyone who actually knows will not go on the record on this site (nor should they), but CompensateMe is generally quite well-informed and his statements on this subject are credible and he claims to have first-person contacts confirming his statements; further these claims have been discussed by many professionals who actually do have contacts in the industry.

Quoting klkla (Reply 114):
Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 101):t. DL insiders have confirmed that DL received compensation (again, credits toward the 739) for the 787.Source?

Quoting klkla (Reply 114):
Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 92): deferral penalties likely wiped out whatever early incentives NW received. There were no deferral penalties

Since you're so quick to demand a source from CompensateMe, let me be the first to ask you for your definitive source that "there were no deferral penalties". No speculation. And, no, your assertion that "it's common sense" doesn't cut it.

[Edited for clarity.]

[Edited 2015-10-09 18:31:27]

MrHMSH · Sat Oct 10, 2015 2:25 am

Quoting northwestEWR (Reply 64):
Seems Delta isn't alone in finding the A330NEO and especially the 338 lacking.

The A338 is not terribly competitive except for specific cases (e.g. HA were steadfast in their desire for a smaller widebody than the A359/A333). But to say DL finds the A330neo lacking makes no sense: why would they order it at all, let alone 25 of them if they didn't think it was a good fit?

Quoting ThirtyWest (Reply 85):

The rumor has it that, if an arrangement can be worked out for used 772ERs from some source, DAL would cancel the A359 order (or perhaps convert the order to another Airbus type).

I've never heard that rumour, I'm not the most fervent at scouring the internet for news, but I think we all would have heard about that one.

Quoting ThirtyWest (Reply 85):
I would tend to be skeptical of this -- seems DAL will need the A359s sooner rather than later, and of course they'd be a longer-term investment than used 772ERs. But is A359 order cancellation a realistic possibility?

You are right to be skeptical, DL ordered A350s less than a year ago, after a carefully studied process. I don't see why they would cancel A350 orders given that they clearly saw Airbus' offer as good enough, both in pricing and availability.

Quoting northwestEWR (Reply 102):

Slot availability and more importantly, PRICING. Airbus needed Delta for the A330NEO and A350 projects way more than Boeing did on the 787 and as such, the price war favored Airbus.

I'm not sure I'd say that for the A350, the A350 is not struggling at all. Ed Bastian of DL is paraphrased as saying that he was 'blown away' by what the A350's business case had to offer, and DL seemed to have a positive opinion of the A330neo from the start, on top of their clear fondness of the A330. It's not just about pricing, Airbus offered a better package, and that could include the products themselves.

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 111):
At the same price, the 339's only possible advantages over the 789 could be cheaper maintenance in the short term (given Delta TechOps's existing A330 expertise) and easier integration into Delta's fleet. Those aren't trivial things, but they're also not the biggest factors. The 789 wins on passenger capacity (assuming 9Y 787 vs. 8Y A330), cargo capacity, empty weight, fuel consumption, range, and trip cost, and loses by only the narrowest amount on max payload.

The A330neo sells on price, availability and commonality, not just cheaper maintenance. Price is important to DL, as their heavy use of second hand aircraft shows, they need new aircraft somewhat soon (though the A330neos are to be delivered starting 2019, quite late actually), and commonality is fairly important given that they have no 787s but plenty of A330s.

Despite that, I do see where the 787 would fit at DL, in the absence of an MoM from Boeing, that's the best 767 replacement unless you were to drastically change your route structure.

seabosdca · Sat Oct 10, 2015 5:01 am

Quoting flyabr (Reply 124):
The A330NEO for TATL ops really didn't have any competition excepting perhaps a very good price on CEO A330s. Gnerally speaking DL management seems to consider the 788/789/A359 as aircraft where the aircraft's inherent capability is wasted and not needed on TATL missions.

The 789, though, doesn't pay any price for its extra capability... except, well, price. It's lighter, more fuel-efficient, and has (marginally) more capacity. That is why I keep saying pricing was so important. The only reason the 789 would be "too much aircraft" for TATL is that it's more expensive than the 339. Which it is. There is absolutely no way Boeing, hard up for slots and still fighting high production costs, would have been able to match a serious Airbus offer on the 339. (The 359 is a different story and I expect Boeing's 789 price was probably below Airbus's 359 price.)

I think a combination of superior performance and availability on the 359, and, yes, very low price on the 339 swung the order. Airbus absolutely had a better proposal. But pricing on the 339 was a big part of the reason why.

Quoting MrHMSH (Reply 127):
(though the A330neos are to be delivered starting 2019, quite late actually)

Funny how 339s to be delivered in 2019 are clearly the aircraft of the future while 787s to be delivered in 2020 are a red herring and will never be taken.

[Edited 2015-10-09 22:02:23]

flyabr · Sat Oct 10, 2015 6:03 am

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 128):
I think a combination of superior performance and availability on the 359, and, yes, very low price on the 339 swung the order. Airbus absolutely had a better proposal. But pricing on the 339 was a big part of the reason why.

I've never really argued against the idea that pricing was a big factor in DL's selection of Airbus WB aircraft in the most recent competition. But I do think that recent "win" by Airbus has solidified the A330 and A350 at DL; and has subsequently severely minimized the chances of any 787 showing up in the DL fleet for at least the next decade.

[Edited 2015-10-09 23:04:05]

MrHMSH · Sat Oct 10, 2015 11:56 am

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 128):
Funny how 339s to be delivered in 2019 are clearly the aircraft of the future while 787s to be delivered in 2020 are a red herring and will never be taken.

Slight difference between them:

DL ordered the A330 last year and decided they wanted it in 2019, it is available in 2017-18. However they've never indicated any huge desire to take the 787s. They might, but the fact that they've pushed it back so far suggests they're sitting on the fence with it. Can you supply evidence that they will certainly take them? You'll probably only find vague statements but nothing certain.

JerseyFlyer · Sat Oct 10, 2015 12:18 pm

Quoting MrHMSH (Reply 130):
DL ordered the A330 last year and decided they wanted it in 2019, it is available in 2017-18.

They may have hoped to pick up some more (very cheap) ceos before 2019.

delimit · Sat Oct 10, 2015 5:12 pm

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 128):
I think a combination of superior performance and availability on the 359, and, yes, very low price on the 339 swung the order. Airbus absolutely had a better proposal. But pricing on the 339 was a big part of the reason why.

Delta would have received launch pricing on the 339. I don't think it's particularly far fetched to assume they got a very good deal on them. That's not implying Airbus was massively discounting them relative to other buyers; that's standard behavior for a launch order.

Quoting MrHMSH (Reply 130):
Can you supply evidence that they will certainly take them? You'll probably only find vague statements but nothing certain.

The continued existence of the order is evidence. That's not proof they will eventually take them; it's proof that they still are considering it (which is all anyone is arguing). If Delta wanted out of the 787 order, it would have been rolled into the 737 order.

bobnwa · Sat Oct 10, 2015 5:14 pm

Quoting flyabr (Reply 117):
Also, since Airbus gives away planes to get 'em sold.

that statementt has been made a few times on Anet but never backed up with valid facts. Your chance to make me change that opinion Also in passing, it does not matter one iota to me whether Boring or airbus is chosen

flyabr · Sat Oct 10, 2015 5:19 pm

Quoting bobnwa (Reply 133):
statementt has been made a few times on Anet but never backed up with valid facts. Your chance to make me change that opinion Also in passing, it does not matter one iota to me whether Boring or airbus is chosen

I was being sarcastic!

seabosdca · Sat Oct 10, 2015 5:53 pm

Quoting MrHMSH (Reply 130):
However they've never indicated any huge desire to take the 787s.

That is a matter of opinion, and I don't think it's supported by the facts. They clearly did not want to take them in 2010, but they kept the order on the books despite 1) the opportunity to cancel it without penalty given the delays and 2) the opportunity to roll it into the 737-900ER order. As of today, the 339 portion of the Airbus order plus the 787 order gets you most of the way to 767-300ER replacement. I continue to think the best explanation of the facts is this:

1) Because Boeing so desperately needed early slots, Delta got a highly favorable deal on the deferral of the NW 787 order.
2) Delta chose the timing of the 787 deferral based on what it thought, at the time, was the most logical timetable for 767-300ER replacement.
3) Boeing was unwilling or unable to offer the same sort of very attractive pricing for more 787s, delivered sooner, in the recent RFP. This makes sense because of continued high production costs and demand for near-term 787 slots.
4) Airbus had more of both incentive and ability to offer excellent pricing on the 339. The Airbus package was also compelling because it offered very good availability on the 359, a truly excellent product.
5) Delta will end up with a 787/A330/A350 fleet thanks to the circumstances of each deal. Such a fleet will offer a lot of flexibility, and Delta will fly enough of each aircraft to achieve reasonable economies of scale. As a bonus, the mixed fleet will keep both manufacturers on their toes for future orders.

Prost · Sat Oct 10, 2015 6:25 pm

Doesn't the 2020-2022 time frame mesh well with when a tranche of 767s are due for retirement? It doesn't make sense to take the planes any earlier than necessary. I understand that for many parts of the world, the 767s are long past their expiration dates, but DL gets every last mile they can from their equipment, so taking the 787 in the early part of the next decade seemed like a prudent decision.

northwestEWR · Sat Oct 10, 2015 6:48 pm

Quoting Prost (Reply 136):
Doesn't the 2020-2022 time frame mesh well with when a tranche of 767s are due for retirement? It doesn't make sense to take the planes any earlier than necessary. I understand that for many parts of the world, the 767s are long past their expiration dates, but DL gets every last mile they can from their equipment, so taking the 787 in the early part of the next decade seemed like a prudent decision.

You are exactly right. They're milking the 763ERs as long as they can--they're paid for, they're reasonably efficient and they're product-competitive for the routes they fly. Might as well fly them as long as you can.

Come 2020, there are 50+ 767-300ERs that will be due for replacement and as I have said repeatedly, the A330-900 is simply too large and too heavy to fill that role. It also coincides with the deferred 788 delivery dates. Remember that the last RFP which resulted in the 339 and 359 was to replace the 747 capacity and for expansion. The 767s have not been RFP'd yet. Stay tuned.

MrHMSH · Sat Oct 10, 2015 6:49 pm

Quoting delimit (Reply 132):
The continued existence of the order is evidence.

Quoting delimit (Reply 132):
That's not proof they will eventually take them; it's proof that they still are considering it (which is all anyone is arguing).

DL would be stupid if they weren't considering it, and I'm sure they are. But until they say that they will definitely take them, all we can do is speculate. The continued existance of the order doesn't tell us much: there are plenty of A380 orders that continue to exist, but that doesn't stop people (including myself) seeing them as unlikely.

Quoting delimit (Reply 132):
If Delta wanted out of the 787 order, it would have been rolled into the 737 order.

Maybe, but I didn't say they wanted out, I said they were sitting on the fence. Which they are.

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 135):
That is a matter of opinion, and I don't think it's supported by the facts.

If DL come out with a statement, I will hold my hands up and admit I was wrong. But there's little evidence.

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 135):
They clearly did not want to take them in 2010, but they kept the order on the books despite 1) the opportunity to cancel it without penalty given the delays

Again, VS and the A380 is not a dissimilar situation. DL may cancel, they may not. We have to wait and see.

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 135):
2) the opportunity to roll it into the 737-900ER order. As of today, the 339 portion of the Airbus order plus the 787 order gets you most of the way to 767-300ER replacement.

It probably does, I'll take your word for it.

flyabr · Sat Oct 10, 2015 7:05 pm

Quoting northwestEWR (Reply 137):
Come 2020, there are 50+ 767-300ERs that will be due for replacement and as I have said repeatedly, the A330-900 is simply too large and too heavy to fill that role. It also coincides with the deferred 788 delivery dates. Remember that the last RFP which resulted in the 339 and 359 was to replace the 747 capacity and for expansion. The 767s have not been RFP'd yet. Stay tuned.

DL press release specifies the A339 as replacing some 763ERs. For some reason you continue to exclude the A332 and A338 which are real possibilties to replace more 763ers when the time comes. The capacity gap between the A332 and 763ER is not big at all! The floating 788 order will likely go toward the acquisition of "other aircraft".

http://goo.gl/hfSfRi

[Edited 2015-10-10 12:07:56]

OA412 · Sat Oct 10, 2015 8:03 pm

Quoting bobnwa (Reply 133):

Oh dear lord. I don't even know what to say when even a smiley isn't enough to tip someone off that a poster is being sarcastic...

Quoting flyabr (Reply 139):
DL press release specifies the A339 as replacing some 763ERs.

Exactly. There are plenty of former 763 routes now being flown by the A333. The trend has been toward larger aircraft in general. Of course there are some routes that will require a smaller aircraft, but it doesn't automatically mean an aircraft with the 763's exact capacity.

flyabr · Sat Oct 10, 2015 8:39 pm

Quoting northwestEWR (Reply 118):
They're still too big. Even for cheap.

For reference here are some examples of seating capacity:

AA 788 226 seats
UA 788 219 seats
DL 332 234 seats

So, is the A332/A338 just as likely a replacement for the 763ER as the 788...yup!

northwestEWR · Sat Oct 10, 2015 8:42 pm

Quoting flyabr (Reply 139):
DL press release specifies the A339 as replacing some 763ERs. For some reason you continue to exclude the A332 and A338 which are real possibilties to replace more 763ers when the time comes. The capacity gap between the A332 and 763ER is not big at all! The floating 788 order will likely go toward the acquisition of "other aircraft".

I've never said the 767 RFP wouldn't put the A330-8NEO up against the 787-8. There's little doubt that it will--BUT the 787-8 is a substantially better airplane than the A330-8NEO and it will come down to pricing. Airbus has a significant interest in selling more of the A330NEOs, especially the -8, while Boeing doesn't "need" Delta on the 787 program. However, because we already have orders on the books for the 787-8, that may cover much of the price gap and make the 787 a lot more attractive.

I'm about 85% certain that we'll see the 787 at Delta since long-term, it's a significantly better product than the NEO, but Airbus could offer Delta a deal they can't pass up and the performance difference won't make up. We'll have to see. It's ridiculous to rule out the 787 at Delta when we already have orders for them AND they're the substantially better product in the capacity range we need.

flyabr · Sat Oct 10, 2015 8:49 pm

Quoting northwestEWR (Reply 142):
BUT the 787-8 is a substantially better airplane than the A330-8NEO

But is it on shorter TATL routes?? I have my doubts.

Quoting northwestEWR (Reply 142):
I'm about 85% certain that we'll see the 787 at Delta since long-term,

Given recent WB orders...it will be a long, long time if it ever occurs.

Quoting northwestEWR (Reply 142):
It's ridiculous to rule out the 787 at Delta when we already have orders for them

Again, orders that were not initiated by DL, and have been delayed for a dozen years. That doesn't bode well for said aircraft ever entering the fleet. I hope you're right, but what has taken place gives me MAJOR pause!

scbriml · Sat Oct 10, 2015 10:23 pm

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 135):
They clearly did not want to take them in 2010, but they kept the order on the books despite 1) the opportunity to cancel it without penalty given the delays and 2) the opportunity to roll it into the 737-900ER order.

Replace DL with VS and 787 with A380. How many people believe VS will ever take delivery of the A380s they have on order?

klkla · Sat Oct 10, 2015 11:02 pm

Quoting flyabr (Reply 143):
Again, orders that were not initiated by DL, and have been delayed for a dozen years. That doesn't bode well for said aircraft ever entering the fleet. I hope you're right, but what has taken place gives me MAJOR pause!

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/delta-defers-first-787-delivery-to-2020-348902/

From the article,

"Delta Air Lines has reconfirmed its order for 18 Boeing 787-8s but has deferred deliveries to between 2020 and 2022.

Ending extended uncertainty around the state of its 787 order, Delta disclosed today in a filing with the US Security and Exchange Commission that it has entered into an agreement with Boeing to reaffirm the order. As part of the agreement Delta discloses it has deferred delivery of the 18 aircraft, which originally were slated to arrive between 2008 and 2010, to between 2020 and 2022.'

That means it's an actual Delta order now.

flyabr · Sat Oct 10, 2015 11:11 pm

Quoting klkla (Reply 145):
That means it's an actual Delta order now.

Semantics...the order was initiated by NW. If DL had set in motion it's own order for 787s prior to NW merger, I might feel differently. As it stands...I feel the chance of seeing any 787 in DL colors is considerably less than 50% for the next decade.

MrHMSH · Sat Oct 10, 2015 11:12 pm

Quoting klkla (Reply 145):
That means it's an actual Delta order now.

That's from 5 years ago, and a lot can and has changed in that time: I'm not certain many people foresaw an A350 order for DL, let alone a nonexistant A330neo. It would seem that DL are pretty clear on the 787 from that, but again, they seem to be sitting on the fence with this one.

delimit · Sun Oct 11, 2015 2:28 pm

Quoting MrHMSH (Reply 147):
I'm not certain many people foresaw an A350 order for DL, let alone a nonexistant A330neo.

Airbus won this order based on availability of delivery slots (as well as a strong offering, obviously). The 787 backlog is still fairly absurd, and growing rather than shrinking.

bobnwa · Sun Oct 11, 2015 2:42 pm

Quoting OA412 (Reply 140):
Oh dear lord. I don't even know what to say when even a smiley isn't enough to tip someone off that a poster is being sarcastic...

I guess I am so used to seeing ridiculous remarks on Anet I didn't see the smiley.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net