Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
SQ22
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 2149
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2012 9:29 am

Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sat Apr 16, 2016 9:13 am

Previous thread has been locked, please continue your discussion here.

Part 2:

Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 2 (by SQ22 Apr 9 2016 in Civil Aviation)

Part 1:

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 1 (by chrisp390 Apr 7 2016 in Civil Aviation)
 
Beatyair
Posts: 856
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 9:09 pm

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sat Apr 16, 2016 4:30 pm

The was mention on BNN, that Delta has also asked about the CS500 development. Bombardier has been asked about the possibility of a CS500 at the Paris Air Show by Airline representatives. BNN went on to say that is may be the opening the Canadian Government would need to help out and avoid any trade implications with the U.S. Money would not go direct to the manufacture, but to special grant for research and development. I wonder how Many other have mentions the CS500?
 
User avatar
JetBuddy
Posts: 2586
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 1:04 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sat Apr 16, 2016 4:39 pm

Quoting Beatyair (Reply 1):
The was mention on BNN, that Delta has also asked about the CS500 development. Bombardier has been asked about the possibility of a CS500 at the Paris Air Show by Airline representatives. BNN went on to say that is may be the opening the Canadian Government would need to help out and avoid any trade implications with the U.S. Money would not go direct to the manufacture, but to special grant for research and development. I wonder how Many other have mentions the CS500?

That is interesting indeed. What is BNN btw? I'd love for Bombardier to launch a CS500, but it's a bit premature right now. I'm hoping this Delta order comes to fruitition, and Bombarder receives a couple more large orders like these.. then they might start feeling confident enough for a CS500.
 
User avatar
GE9X
Posts: 272
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 12:13 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sat Apr 16, 2016 5:55 pm

Quoting JetBuddy (Reply 2):
What is BNN btw?

Probably the Business News Network, a Canadian cable channel modeled after CNBC.

I agree that any talk of the CS500 is a bit premature. I think it will be an obvious development especially if the program is vindicated but Bombardier will have to sell a bit more CSeries and prove its financial capacity before it can go ahead. And if the way Boeing and Airbus have (successfully) fought the CSeries so far is any indication, we're in for quite a war should the CS500 go ahead. I wonder what the technical challenges are though, would it be as simple as stretching the fuselage and throwing 27000 lbf engines or would it require a new wing and/or landing gear?

Once a CSeries fleet is established at Delta and commonality arguments lose lift, I can definitely see a fleet of CS500 happening as a true MD-90 replacement.
 
Prost
Posts: 2592
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:23 pm

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sat Apr 16, 2016 6:38 pm

The Globe and Mail was mentioning $6 Billion for 75 CS300's, but even with the proverbial 50% discount, this still works out to be $40 Million per frame, much worse than UA's deal of $22 Million/ 737-700. Of course the deal isn't done and we don't know the true numbers yet, so we'll have to be patient I suppose.
 
ytz
Posts: 3529
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:31 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sat Apr 16, 2016 7:00 pm

Quoting Beatyair (Reply 1):


Boeing needs to be careful under cutting Bombardier. The RCAF is one of the few countries looking at buying the Super Hornet. A Boeing defence line that is coming to an end and it is looking for an order as well. Business is business until it becomes personal. They need to play by the rules of good business without exposing your right flank.


The government's deferal of a new fighter to beyond 2019, all but rules out the Super Hornet. And it's the dog of a fighter that most of the RCAF air staff dislikes.
 
ytz
Posts: 3529
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:31 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sat Apr 16, 2016 7:09 pm

Quoting Beatyair (Reply 1):
The was mention on BNN, that Delta has also asked about the CS500 development.

This:

Quoting JetBuddy (Reply 2):
I'd love for Bombardier to launch a CS500, but it's a bit premature right now.

  

Exactly. Where do they get capital for this? Unless they get a government bailout, there's no way the CS500 is going forward anytime soon. As much as all of us CSeries fans would love to see it.

Clearly the wing is sized to build a CS500. And they're obviously going to build it at some point. But they need to fill the pipeline first. And actually start making money (not just these initial loss leader sales).


Moreover with DL, not sure where it would fit. In the long run DL is better off using 738s (NG or MAX) to replace the MDs.

[Edited 2016-04-16 12:10:45]
 
ytz
Posts: 3529
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:31 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sat Apr 16, 2016 7:14 pm

Quoting Prost (Reply 4):
The Globe and Mail was mentioning $6 Billion for 75 CS300's, but even with the proverbial 50% discount, this still works out to be $40 Million per frame, much worse than UA's deal of $22 Million/ 737-700. Of course the deal isn't done and we don't know the true numbers yet, so we'll have to be patient I suppose.

I would doubt any number that high. I would bet that DL is not paying more than $25 million a frame. And likely closer to $20 million a frame. Bombardier is desperate enough that they need this order. Even if they sell at a loss. Once they fill the pipeline for the next few years, they can look for profit.

I'm most curious about why they picked the CS300. Are they looking to replace the 319s and 73Gs? The CS300 is too small to replace the MDs. And a tad bigger than the 717 and a good bit bigger than the 190s.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 15100
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sat Apr 16, 2016 8:56 pm

$6 billion for 125 frames at list. That's $24 million per frame at 50% list price.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
Prost
Posts: 2592
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:23 pm

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sat Apr 16, 2016 10:35 pm

I was basing it on 75 frames, not 125. This stuff would be so much easier if they'd let us see the proposed contracts. Sheesh.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20919
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sat Apr 16, 2016 10:42 pm

Quoting ytz (Reply 6):

Exactly. Where do they get capital for this? Unless they get a government bailout, there's no way the CS500 is going forward anytime soon. As much as all of us CSeries fans would love to see it.

Sadly I agree. Too early financially for the CS500.

Quoting ytz (Reply 7):
I'm most curious about why they picked the CS300. Are they looking to replace the 319s and 73Gs? The CS300 is too small to replace the MDs. And a tad bigger than the 717 and a good bit bigger than the 190s.

The CS300 is far more flexible than the MD-80. Per airframe profits will increase, so not small financially.



Lightsaber
I cannot wait to get vaccinated to live again! Warning: I simulated that it takes 50%+ vaccinated to protect the vaccinated and 75%+ vaccinated to protect the vac-hesitant.
 
ytz
Posts: 3529
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:31 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sat Apr 16, 2016 11:00 pm

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 10):
The CS300 is far more flexible than the MD-80. Per airframe profits will increase, so not small financially.

Interesting. But I thought they'd want a 160 seater replacement with lower operating costs, i3. the 738NG/MAX

The CS300 is a 125-130 seater in a DL config. That's quite a bit of a capacity drop, no? If they went 1 for 1, it would be nearly 19% drop in capacity. I wonder how they'll fill the gap. Are they going to buy more CS300s? Or will they upgrade their Boeing and Airbus narrowbodies to the larger sizes (739s and 321s)?

Was hoping to see a CS100 order for delivery later to replace the 717s and 190s. When are they due for replacement?
 
flyDTW1992
Posts: 1058
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 1:04 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sat Apr 16, 2016 11:22 pm

Quoting ytz (Reply 11):
The CS300 is a 125-130 seater in a DL config. That's quite a bit of a capacity drop, no? If they went 1 for 1, it would be nearly 19% drop in capacity. I wonder how they'll fill the gap. Are they going to buy more CS300s? Or will they upgrade their Boeing and Airbus narrowbodies to the larger sizes (739s and 321s)?

I feel as though between A321s, 737-900ERs, and the CS300, the MD88 capacity will be more than covered, accounting for both slight downgauges and slight upgauges. Perhaps if the CS500 does eventually come to fruition, that can be a replacement in the exact capacity range as the MD88s/90s and even the older 738s and A320s.
Now you're flying smart
 
mat66
Posts: 307
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 1:12 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sat Apr 16, 2016 11:25 pm

Quoting ytz (Reply 11):
Interesting. But I thought they'd want a 160 seater replacement with lower operating costs, i3. the 738NG/MAX

The CS300 is a 125-130 seater in a DL config. That's quite a bit of a capacity drop, no? If they went 1 for 1, it would be nearly 19% drop in capacity. I wonder how they'll fill the gap. Are they going to buy more CS300s? Or will they upgrade their Boeing and Airbus narrowbodies to the larger sizes (739s and 321s)?

Was hoping to see a CS100 order for delivery later to replace the 717s and 190s. When are they due for replacement?

Delta has 107 739/A321 on order. While most will replace 757 and 767(nonER) there are freeing up 738/A320 to replace some MD80. And apparently they are about to order 30 more A321. The C300 could spike prices up nicely on some MD80 routes, as well. I think that is called consolidation. Less competition, fewer seats, higher prices, more profit, unhappy customer   has no choice because less competition.

Edit : what flyDTW1992 said Big grin

The 717 will stay a very long time. They will get the first 190 next year.

[Edited 2016-04-16 16:28:18]
 
User avatar
JetBuddy
Posts: 2586
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 1:04 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sat Apr 16, 2016 11:47 pm

Quoting Prost (Reply 4):
The Globe and Mail was mentioning $6 Billion for 75 CS300's, but even with the proverbial 50% discount, this still works out to be $40 Million per frame, much worse than UA's deal of $22 Million/ 737-700. Of course the deal isn't done and we don't know the true numbers yet, so we'll have to be patient I suppose.

I think $40 million is more than what they'll pay, but even at $40 million the CS300 is a much better deal than a $22 million 737-700.

They are generations apart. The 737-700 is proven, solid and relatively simple aircraft. But it's also a hodgepodge of 20 to 60 year old technology and not fuel efficient by any standard. A 737-700 burns between 2440 and 2570 kg/hour, depending on engine rating. The CS300 numbers are 1720 kg/hour, but they're said to even surpass that. That is an enormous difference in fuel burn. Then you put the capacity difference into the mix. The CS300 is capable of taking more pax and bags than the 737-700. The operating costs will be miles apart. And initial bugs in the machinery is something Delta will be able to sort out together with Bombardier. Delta likes to fly their planes for a long time. End of the line 737-700s is not an investment into the future.
 
cessna2
Posts: 400
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 6:16 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sun Apr 17, 2016 1:21 am

Quoting ytz (Reply 11):
The CS300 is a 125-130 seater in a DL config.

I think Delta could easily squeeze 140-145 into the CS300.
 
User avatar
GE9X
Posts: 272
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 12:13 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sun Apr 17, 2016 1:41 am

Quoting cessna2 (Reply 15):
I think Delta could easily squeeze 140-145 into the CS300.

Not without dumping first class, which is beyond unlikely.
 
User avatar
deltadawg
Posts: 1014
Joined: Sat May 13, 2006 2:56 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sun Apr 17, 2016 4:58 am

Quoting GE9X (Reply 16):

Quoting cessna2 (Reply 15):
I think Delta could easily squeeze 140-145 into the CS300.

Not without dumping first class, which is beyond unlikely.

Not just first class but don't expect DL to get rid of DeltaOne either. While I have no connection to DL accounting the DeltaOne seats must be paying for themselves because they would have been gone had they not.

Quoting JetBuddy (Reply 14):
But it's also a hodgepodge of 20 to 60 year old technology and not fuel efficient by any standard. A 737-700 burns between 2440 and 2570 kg/hour, depending on engine rating. The CS300 numbers are 1720 kg/hour, but they're said to even surpass that. That is an enormous difference in fuel burn.

Not a user of metrics much of the time so I did some converting and based upon 1kg of jet fuel equaling 0.3261 gallons of fuel your comparison in fuel burn comes out to a difference of 850kg on the high side which is equal to 277.2 gallons of fuel per hour difference. Based on Platts index average airline fuel costs as of April 1st was $1.059 per gallon in North America. That comes out to a difference of $293.55 per hour and take a typical route DL would use with the CSeries, ATL-GRR, which is approximately 1-1/2 hour flight or $440.33 less per flight for the CS300 versus a 737-700. Obviously this does not include taxiing and delays and may not seem like a huge difference but in the airline industry I am sure it is a massive amount especially when fuel is relatively inexpensive so when fuel climbs back up over $2.50 and up that number will mean much much more.

Quoting Beatyair (Reply 1):
The was mention on BNN, that Delta has also asked about the CS500 development. Bombardier has been asked about the possibility of a CS500 at the Paris Air Show by Airline representatives.

DL cannot be the first to ask BBD about the possibility of a CS500. I have to believe that AC had to have asked as well seeing the CS500 would look to be almost a direct replacement for their A320's in terms of capacity and most likely identical range to the NEO and superior range to the CEO. Same goes for SR and any others that might envision larger loads of passengers in the future. I think we all know that BBD just cannot take on a CS500 until some cash flow starts coming in as well as freeing up engineering. With that being said I am willing to bet that DL will put a time limit on their "want" for a CS500. IF we do indeed see a 75+ order for CS300's I am confident a CS500 will be launched within 18 months and that DL may very well be the launch customer should the CS300 integration go smoothly.
GO Dawgs, Sic' em, woof woof woof
 
User avatar
JetBuddy
Posts: 2586
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 1:04 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sun Apr 17, 2016 12:13 pm

Quoting deltadawg (Reply 17):
Not a user of metrics much of the time so I did some converting and based upon 1kg of jet fuel equaling 0.3261 gallons of fuel your comparison in fuel burn comes out to a difference of 850kg on the high side which is equal to 277.2 gallons of fuel per hour difference. Based on Platts index average airline fuel costs as of April 1st was $1.059 per gallon in North America. That comes out to a difference of $293.55 per hour and take a typical route DL would use with the CSeries, ATL-GRR, which is approximately 1-1/2 hour flight or $440.33 less per flight for the CS300 versus a 737-700. Obviously this does not include taxiing and delays and may not seem like a huge difference but in the airline industry I am sure it is a massive amount especially when fuel is relatively inexpensive so when fuel climbs back up over $2.50 and up that number will mean much much more.

Indeed! The fuel prices we have now are not normal, and I'm sure Delta is thinking fuel at $100/bbl when they consider potential aircraft for a 20-30 year investment. So those $440 savings per flight might end up being $1200 in a few years. I don't know the fleet utilization numbers for the MD-88 fleet, but I'm sure they'd want to keep their new planes in the air as much as possible. So maybe 9 or more such flights per day means a lot of money saved over the lifespan of the aircraft.

If we do an estimated savings on fuel at $1000 per flight per day over the next 24 years after delivery (guessing estimated lifespan before 3rd D-check), 9 flights per day, 350 days per year (taking 2 weeks of mx time per year?) we get $3,150,000 fuel savings yearly and $75,600,000 saved in fuel alone over the life of the aircraft compared to a 737-700. And those are conservative numbers with fuel at roughly $90/bbl. And then we haven't even looked at the improved revenue because of the larger capacity. $22 million 737-700s suddenly don't look so appealing compared to $40 million CS300s.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 8767
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sun Apr 17, 2016 1:00 pm

Quoting JetBuddy (Reply 18):
If we do an estimated savings on fuel at $1000 per flight per day over the next 24 years after delivery (guessing estimated lifespan before 3rd D-check), 9 flights per day, 350 days per year (taking 2 weeks of mx time per year?) we get $3,150,000 fuel savings yearly and $75,600,000 saved in fuel alone over the life of the aircraft compared to a 737-700.

Do Net Present Value calculations instead of straight-line cumulative savings. At any reasonable risk-adjusted cost of capital those potential savings in years 15+ are pretty meaningless. Contrast that to the certainty of capital spending made to buy those aircraft.
 
User avatar
KGRB
Posts: 736
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2010 6:19 pm

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sun Apr 17, 2016 1:09 pm

Quoting deltadawg (Reply 17):

Not just first class but don't expect DL to get rid of DeltaOne either. While I have no connection to DL accounting the DeltaOne seats must be paying for themselves because they would have been gone had they not.

Do you mean Delta Comfort+? A DeltaOne cabin surely will not be installed on these aircraft.
First flight: NW DC-10 MKE-MSP December 1996
Most recent flight: DL/9E CRJ-900 LGA-MSN January 2020
 
815Oceanic
Posts: 181
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 12:53 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sun Apr 17, 2016 2:33 pm

Quoting JetBuddy (Reply 18):

9 flights a day is pretty ambitious. Most mainline aircraft average 4-4.5 flights a day. Also, long term estimates have fuel stabilizing around $50/barrel. I'm not saying the C-Seroes isn't a good choice, but UA also knows what they're doing.
 
User avatar
deltadawg
Posts: 1014
Joined: Sat May 13, 2006 2:56 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sun Apr 17, 2016 3:02 pm

Quoting KGRB (Reply 20):
Do you mean Delta Comfort+? A DeltaOne cabin surely will not be installed on these aircraft.

Yes, you are correct. DeltaComfort. Brain fart and late at night. Thanks.
GO Dawgs, Sic' em, woof woof woof
 
INFINITI329
Posts: 2545
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 12:53 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sun Apr 17, 2016 4:04 pm

Quoting ytz (Reply 11):
Interesting. But I thought they'd want a 160 seater replacement with lower operating costs, i3. the 738NG/MAX

The CS300 is a 125-130 seater in a DL config. That's quite a bit of a capacity drop, no? If they went 1 for 1, it would be nearly 19% drop in capacity. I wonder how they'll fill the gap. Are they going to buy more CS300s? Or will they upgrade their Boeing and Airbus narrowbodies to the larger sizes (739s and 321s)?

This my theory

The CS300 will replace MD-80 routes where a shrink in capacity is not big deal. 738s/320s will take on those MD-80 routes that where as the capacity must remain relativity constant. New 739s/321s would back fill those 738s/320s routes where growth can be had.

The CS300 will also open some routes that were just to short for a MD-80 to make it but to much aircraft to put a 738 on.

I do believe that the DL narrow body order will encompass the CS300 (with a few CS100s) & the 321.

Quoting 815Oceanic (Reply 21):
I'm not saying the C-Seroes isn't a good choice, but UA also knows what they're doing.

Id pick DL over UA. UA is only now getting their act together.
 
User avatar
FLALEFTY
Posts: 834
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 11:33 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sun Apr 17, 2016 4:37 pm

Once Delta takes delivery of the CS300s and gets them technically sorted out, they should have a pretty effective tool. The 3,000+ NM max range will give it flexibility to rotate around their system and also serve as an efficient "hub raider" (a task now typically done by RJs). The short field performance allowing use of a little as a 5,000 ft. runway makes it good for "hot, high & short-field" routes (e.g. their seasonal services to Rocky Mountain resorts). The capacity, at 130 seats, dual-class, will fit nicely in the slot between the B717s and the B738s and A320s.

Along with replacing the MD88s, I expect the CS300s will ultimately be replacing Delta's "hot & high" sub-fleet of B737-700s, as well as the A319s, too. Down the road, when the B717 leases run out, the CS300s will probably replace those, too.

It still remains to be seen what Delta plans to use to replace their fairly-elderly fleet of A320s and B738s. Will they choose MAX, or NEO? That's the next big order to watch for.

[Edited 2016-04-17 09:38:46]
 
User avatar
crimsonchin
Posts: 566
Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 8:16 pm

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sun Apr 17, 2016 5:28 pm

Did Boeing run out of $30m 737s to sell or something?
 
flyabr
Posts: 869
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2003 11:42 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sun Apr 17, 2016 5:58 pm

Quoting FLALEFTY (Reply 24):
It still remains to be seen what Delta plans to use to replace their fairly-elderly fleet of A320s and B738s. Will they choose MAX, or NEO? That's the next big order to watch for.

By DL standards the 738s are fairly young at only 15 years average for the fleet. I do know some of those A320s are gettin' up there! Anyone know how old the oldest 738 and A320 is in the fleet?
 
User avatar
JetBuddy
Posts: 2586
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 1:04 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sun Apr 17, 2016 6:00 pm

Quoting 815Oceanic (Reply 21):
9 flights a day is pretty ambitious. Most mainline aircraft average 4-4.5 flights a day. Also, long term estimates have fuel stabilizing around $50/barrel. I'm not saying the C-Seroes isn't a good choice, but UA also knows what they're doing.

Yes indeed, but the 9 flights in the calculations were average sector length flights of 1,5 hours. That's just 13,5 hours flight time per day, which is not much. The 4-5 daily flights you talk about includes longer sectors for several hours, which would only make the savings per flight larger. So the calculation still stands. And we're talking about the Delta MD-88 fleet, not average mainline for the whole world.

Quoting MIflyer12 (Reply 19):
Do Net Present Value calculations instead of straight-line cumulative savings. At any reasonable risk-adjusted cost of capital those potential savings in years 15+ are pretty meaningless. Contrast that to the certainty of capital spending made to buy those aircraft.

Yes, it's certainly a back of the napkin type of calculation and it doesn't take into account things like currency inflation and devaluation of the aircraft. But it's still pretty clear that the fuel savings are very large, and that the CS300 is an investment into the future, while the 737-700 is not.
 
Scorpio
Posts: 5046
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2001 3:48 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sun Apr 17, 2016 6:07 pm

Quoting flyabr (Reply 26):
Anyone know how old the oldest 738 and A320 is in the fleet?

Oldest 738 (N371DA) was delivered in October 1998. Oldest A320 (N309US) was delivered in October 1990.
 
TheAccountant
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2015 10:41 pm

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sun Apr 17, 2016 6:19 pm

Quoting JetBuddy (Reply 27):
Yes indeed, but the 9 flights in the calculations were average sector length flights of 1,5 hours. That's just 13,5 hours flight time per day, which is not much. The 4-5 daily flights you talk about includes longer sectors for several hours, which would only make the savings per flight larger. So the calculation still stands. And we're talking about the Delta MD-88 fleet, not average mainline for the whole world.

If you assume 10 minutes taxi out, 90 minute flight, 5 minutes taxi in, 45 minutes at the gate to turn around, then 10 minute taxi out, 90 minute flight, 5 minute taxi in, 45 minutes ground time and so-on for 9 segments in one day, you will come to a 21 hour and 45 minute operating day, even if it is only 13.5 hours of flight time. That is not realistic.

And fuel efficiency differences between older and newer more advanced aircraft is much less noticeable on short segments. $1,000 per flight in fuel savings is probably too aggressive along with your operations per day assumption
 
User avatar
coronado
Posts: 1278
Joined: Sat Jun 26, 1999 9:42 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sun Apr 17, 2016 6:55 pm

118 MD-88 substituted by 75 CS300 and 30 A321ceo is a pretty much capacity neutral plan. The 50 options for CS300 and I expect another dozen or so 717 (from Volotea) will be IMHO for upgauging regional capacity over to mainline.
The Original Coronado: First CV jet flights RG CV 990 July 1965; DL CV 880 July 1965; Spantax CV990 Feb 1973
 
bobnwa
Posts: 4514
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2000 12:10 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sun Apr 17, 2016 7:04 pm

Quoting FLALEFTY (Reply 24):
Once Delta takes delivery of the CS300s and gets them technically sorted out, they should have a pretty effective tool. T

First, before delivery, Delta has to order them, which they have not done as yet.
 
User avatar
JetBuddy
Posts: 2586
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 1:04 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sun Apr 17, 2016 8:06 pm

Quoting TheAccountant (Reply 29):
If you assume 10 minutes taxi out, 90 minute flight, 5 minutes taxi in, 45 minutes at the gate to turn around, then 10 minute taxi out, 90 minute flight, 5 minute taxi in, 45 minutes ground time and so-on for 9 segments in one day, you will come to a 21 hour and 45 minute operating day, even if it is only 13.5 hours of flight time. That is not realistic.

And fuel efficiency differences between older and newer more advanced aircraft is much less noticeable on short segments. $1,000 per flight in fuel savings is probably too aggressive along with your operations per day assumption

I know better than arguing with an accountant.  But yes, you're right. 9 sectors per day is a bit too much, even for shorter flights. 45 minute turnaround seems like a stretch, a 737-800 can be turned around in 20 minutes today. A CS300 is a little bit smaller, so to meet you half way, let's make it 30 minutes. And yes, shorter flights might not save as much fuel.. but that really depends on the fuel burn in climb-out, which is also likely considerably less than a 737-700. But I don't have those numbers.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sun Apr 17, 2016 8:20 pm

Quoting GE9X (Reply 3):
And if the way Boeing and Airbus have (successfully) fought the CSeries so far is any indication, we're in for quite a war should the CS500 go ahead. I wonder what the technical challenges are though, would it be as simple as stretching the fuselage and throwing 27000 lbf engines or would it require a new wing and/or landing gear?

Well, from what I know, it'd be largely the same wing torque box - which as most know didn't break in ultimate limit test - the rig couldn't displace it far enough to break!

There would probably be a few more lamina on the covers and spars (designed for consistent strain rates across the 100/300, so no reason not to follow that for a 500).

The moveables and support structures... well. They'd need more work.

The landing gear support structure would also need much more work, and by all indications I have, redesigns.

Also, as I said elsewhere, it would almost certainly need an entirely new batch of analyses for certification reports.


The fuse, I don't know so much about, so can't really comment.
 
User avatar
RayChuang
Posts: 8139
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2000 7:43 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sun Apr 17, 2016 8:20 pm

The more I think about it, the more I think is that DL's new narrowbody order is to replace the 116 MD-80's now flying for the airline. Is is possible that Boeing will offer a large number of 73G's at a very cheap price or the 737 MAX 7 at a substantial discount?
 
chiad
Posts: 1346
Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 4:24 pm

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sun Apr 17, 2016 8:23 pm

Seems like Airbus could win the high end of this narrowbody replacement.

Airbus Poised To Win Delta Deal For 30+ A321's (by chiad Apr 17 2016 in Civil Aviation)
 
deltal1011man
Posts: 5375
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:17 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Sun Apr 17, 2016 8:25 pm

Quoting ytz (Reply 7):

I'm most curious about why they picked the CS300. Are they looking to replace the 319s and 73Gs? The CS300 is too small to replace the MDs. And a tad bigger than the 717 and a good bit bigger than the 190s.

No. The 73W/319 fleet have about 15 more years to go before they are due for replacement.

Quoting ytz (Reply 11):

Was hoping to see a CS100 order for delivery later to replace the 717s and 190s. When are they due for replacement?


You will see come C100s but the 717 is also at about its half life.

DL plans on keeping planes for 30 years.

Quoting ytz (Reply 11):

The CS300 is a 125-130 seater in a DL config. That's quite a bit of a capacity drop, no? If they went 1 for 1, it would be nearly 19% drop in capacity. I wonder how they'll fill the gap. Are they going to buy more CS300s? Or will they upgrade their Boeing and Airbus narrowbodies to the larger sizes (739s and 321s)?

You'll see a 737 and or 320 order too. Bastian has said they will go with a mix of capacity to replace the MD88s. C100,C300 and more 321s and 739s were directly talked about.

Quoting mat66 (Reply 13):

Delta has 107 739/A321 on order. While most will replace 757 and 767(nonER) there are freeing up 738/A320 to replace some MD80. And apparently they are about to order 30 more A321. The C300 could spike prices up nicely on some MD80 routes, as well. I think that is called consolidation. Less competition, fewer seats, higher prices, more profit, unhappy customer   has no choice because less competition.

and FWIW DL is about done replacing 757s. (I think they have like 15 or so left to replace.)
DL originally planned to park 320s but halted that plan because they are doing life extensions on the 320 fleet and the domestic market is seeing more growth and originally expected.

Quoting cessna2 (Reply 15):

I think Delta could easily squeeze 140-145 into the CS300.

no they couldn't. DL isn't a Y only airline.
The C100s will seat less than 100 and the C300 will be in the 130 ball park.

Quoting deltadawg (Reply 17):

Not just first class but don't expect DL to get rid of DeltaOne either. While I have no connection to DL accounting the DeltaOne seats must be paying for themselves because they would have been gone had they not.

You mean EC and correct. These airplanes will come with 3 classes F, EC and Y.

Quoting INFINITI329 (Reply 23):

The CS300 will replace MD-80 routes where a shrink in capacity is not big deal. 738s/320s will take on those MD-80 routes that where as the capacity must remain relativity constant. New 739s/321s would back fill those 738s/320s routes where growth can be had.

correct.

Quoting FLALEFTY (Reply 24):

It still remains to be seen what Delta plans to use to replace their fairly-elderly fleet of A320s and B738s. Will they choose MAX, or NEO? That's the next big order to watch for.

The 40 or so older 320s yes, the rest of the 320 fleet and the 738 fleet have 10-15 more years before they need replacing.

Quoting FLALEFTY (Reply 24):

Along with replacing the MD88s, I expect the CS300s will ultimately be replacing Delta's "hot & high" sub-fleet of B737-700s, as well as the A319s, too.

again, in 15 years(later for the 73Gs. They aren't even 10 yet)

Quoting FLALEFTY (Reply 24):
Down the road, when the B717 leases run out, the CS300s will probably replace those, too.

The 717s will become Delta owned with the leases run out.
Again, 30 years or so is the plan. DL doesn't know what the term "simple fleet" means.

Quoting crimsonchin (Reply 25):

Did Boeing run out of $30m 737s to sell or something?

They ran out of anything with a GTF on it. DL really really likes what they see from the GTF. (i do expect 737MAXs with LEAP engines to happen too, but i think they will go PW on the 320NEO or a mix of LEAP and GTF.)

Quoting Coronado (Reply 30):

You'll see some C100s too.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20919
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Mon Apr 18, 2016 12:34 am

Quoting ytz (Reply 11):
But I thought they'd want a 160 seater replacement with lower operating costs, i3. the 738NG/MAX

DL is likely to right size. Some markets will not fill a larger plane.

Quoting mat66 (Reply 13):
The C300 could spike prices up nicely on some MD80 routes, as well. I think that is called consolidation.

To some degree. I see some expansion. Mostly as MD-80s are not used intensely.

Quoting INFINITI329 (Reply 23):
The CS300 will replace MD-80 routes where a shrink in capacity is not big deal

Exactly. Even launch new routes. It could do Hawaii!

Lightsaber
I cannot wait to get vaccinated to live again! Warning: I simulated that it takes 50%+ vaccinated to protect the vaccinated and 75%+ vaccinated to protect the vac-hesitant.
 
Prost
Posts: 2592
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:23 pm

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Mon Apr 18, 2016 1:03 am

Quoting Coronado (Reply 30):
118 MD-88 substituted by 75 CS300 and 30 A321ceo is a pretty much capacity neutral plan. The 50 options for CS300 and I expect another dozen or so 717 (from Volotea) will be IMHO for upgauging regional capacity over to mainline.

I understand that seat wise it may be neutral , how does that make sense if you have 1 MD-88 doing ATL-XXX, another doing ATL-YYY, and a third doing ATL-ZZZ, and you replace it with 1 CS-300 and an A321, but the seats are the same, which city loses service?
 
bucky707
Posts: 955
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2000 2:01 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Mon Apr 18, 2016 1:22 am

Quoting Prost (Reply 38):
understand that seat wise it may be neutral , how does that make sense if you have 1 MD-88 doing ATL-XXX, another doing ATL-YYY, and a third doing ATL-ZZZ, and you replace it with 1 CS-300 and an A321, but the seats are the same, which city loses service?

That assumes an 88 is the optimum aircraft for X, Y, and Z. Different times of day, different days of the week, different times of year demand changes. Rarely is one aircraft the perfect size all the time.

But, if you currently have 6 MD-88 flights to X on any given day, and you replace them a mix of CS-300s and A321s, you can have pretty close to the same capacity with the ability to put the larger aircraft on the times of day that demand more seats.
 
User avatar
coronado
Posts: 1278
Joined: Sat Jun 26, 1999 9:42 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Mon Apr 18, 2016 2:13 am

Quoting Prost (Reply 38):
understand that seat wise it may be neutral , how does that make sense if you have 1 MD-88 doing ATL-XXX, another doing ATL-YYY, and a third doing ATL-ZZZ, and you replace it with 1 CS-300 and an A321, but the seats are the same, which city loses service?


Even Delta will admit that 105 new build aircraft can operate more segments than 118 of the MD88s. They are a bit more maintenance intensive. A CS300 fleet should be able to operate 10% more daily segments than a like number of MD88's. Also take a route such at ATL-MSY which I think tomorrow has a 10 MD88 rotations (plus a couple A320 and one or two more 757 runs, I would suspect that replacing the 10 MD88 rotations with 8 A321 rotations is what the objective of up gauging capacity is all about and IMHO will not jeopardize DL market share on this route. Plus I do think DL will within 2 years have at least a dozen additional 717 and I will not be surprised if they help out GOL with taking over maybe even two dozen 737-800 2 or 3 year loaners while Brazil gets their economy and political scene back on track. I think the 19 E190s listed on DL Dec 31 10k may be moved down to GOL to allow them to maintain routes while down gauging seats.

[Edited 2016-04-17 19:32:54]
The Original Coronado: First CV jet flights RG CV 990 July 1965; DL CV 880 July 1965; Spantax CV990 Feb 1973
 
WaywardMemphian
Posts: 1526
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2014 9:05 pm

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Mon Apr 18, 2016 2:27 am

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 37):
To some degree. I see some expansion. Mostly as MD-80s are not used intensely.

Here in Little ol' XNA , Delta is adding another LGA nonstop this Fall. That will give Little Ol' XNA 5 daily nonstops, well at least during rhe week . AA and DL are offering near identical timed flights in the morning and late afternoon along with United running an afternoon EWR. The prices are very reasonable, averaging 300 to 350 R/T if not booked last minute. I'd love to see a CS100 on this route instead of 700s and 170s.
 
deltal1011man
Posts: 5375
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:17 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Mon Apr 18, 2016 3:34 am

Quoting RayChuang (Reply 34):

The more I think about it, the more I think is that DL's new narrowbody order is to replace the 116 MD-80's now flying for the airline. Is is possible that Boeing will offer a large number of 73G's at a very cheap price or the 737 MAX 7 at a substantial discount?

Boeing can offer all the 73Gs they want....wont change a thing

DL is less after a deal and more after the advancement. Boeing needs to offer cheap 73Gs with GTFs on them to win, same deal with Airbus and the 319. (oh and put 120 of them in the fleet in 4 years, which they can't)

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 37):

Exactly. Even launch new routes. It could do Hawaii!

please no.
 
INFINITI329
Posts: 2545
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 12:53 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Mon Apr 18, 2016 4:50 am

Quoting deltal1011man (Reply 42):
Boeing can offer all the 73Gs they want....wont change a thing

Thank you, There is a reason why DL only has 10 of them.
 
User avatar
anfromme
Posts: 883
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 5:58 pm

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Mon Apr 18, 2016 8:16 am

According to Leeham:
Bombardier’s Delta deal looking good, but don’t celebrate yet
https://leehamnews.com/2016/04/18/bombardiers-delta-deal-looking-good-dont-celebrate-yet/

Personally, I'm keeping my fingers crossed on this one.
42
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 8506
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Mon Apr 18, 2016 11:40 am

Quoting INFINITI329 (Reply 43):

Sure. And I bet you think that Southwest have 480 for sh$&s and gigs?

In the right network the 737-700 and A319 are phenomenal aircraft with decent economics. They aren't a one-size-fits-all type, but they do what they do well. United pretty much took a leaf out of Delta's playbook with the 73G's by taking the older, less efficient type for a song and working on the basis that the saving in capex negates the fuel bill. United wasn't stupid with that order, they showed themselves to be just as smart in their own way as Delta has been with the MD fleet.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
User avatar
czbbflier
Posts: 866
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 1:28 pm

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Mon Apr 18, 2016 1:04 pm

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 45):
Sure. And I bet you think that Southwest have 480 for sh$&s and gigs?

No, they have them because they were the best technology available at the time.

Assuming Delta takes the CSeries, that's now two major North American airlines competing in the market that burns less than 80% the fuel on the same segment.

Aviation fuel is not going to stay cheap as borscht forever and as the CSeries proves itself- one airframe at a time if it must- others will have to follow suit.

Airlines will want a plane that's cheaper to fly than one that's cheaper to buy. ©
(Excuse the "©". I think I just invented a new slogan for Bombardier.)

In addition to the fact that Bombardier is now the only manufacturer building a mainline-sized aircraft that has production slots available now, and for what it's worth, the Canadian Dollar comes up today at 78¢ US (for labour at least), that is why...

Quoting deltal1011man (Reply 42):
Boeing can offer all the 73Gs they want....wont change a thing

(Edited to change fuel burn figures.)



[Edited 2016-04-18 06:26:12]
 
INFINITI329
Posts: 2545
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 12:53 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Mon Apr 18, 2016 1:31 pm

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 45):
Sure. And I bet you think that Southwest have 480 for sh$&s and gigs?

      No genius. WN operates them because fits their model. It is niche with DL. If DL wanted more 73Gs they would have ordered them. They have opted to grow their 737 fleet with 738s & 739s. DL sated publicly that the 73G isnt really their cup of tea. But they need its performance for certain key routes hence the staggering number of 10 in its fleet which were delivered between 2008-2009.
 
CX747
Posts: 6411
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Mon Apr 18, 2016 3:21 pm

Hoping that Boeing swoops in and gets this order with the 73G. Hard for me to fly an "American" carrier that complains against Emirates, the Exim Bank, orders A330/350s and then goes Canadian on this order. Gotta go with the home team for a major order if you want me to buy into your company waving the red white and blue in other areas of your business. No need for any new training with the 73G or maintenance etc. Plug and play which is what I thought Delta was all about ala them staying away from "new" designs like the 787.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
jbs2886
Posts: 2564
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

RE: Delta To Place Narrowbody Order Part 3

Mon Apr 18, 2016 3:37 pm

Quoting CX747 (Reply 48):
Hoping that Boeing swoops in and gets this order with the 73G. Hard for me to fly an "American" carrier that complains against Emirates, the Exim Bank, orders A330/350s and then goes Canadian on this order. Gotta go with the home team for a major order if you want me to buy into your company waving the red white and blue in other areas of your business.

         You're missing the point of the Ex-Im argument; Delta isn't waiving red white and blue. Rather, it is taking issue with lower acquisition costs to foreign carriers of Boeing products. If you were arguing that Delta is taking similar government-sponsored financing for the A330/350s and C-Series (if they order), then your argument would make sense. Otherwise, its just a red herring.

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