notEnuf

Somebody has to explain to me why we never mention the A330-800 as an ER replacement, yet I hear 787-900 a lot.

Tinpusher007

Because the A338 is a turd. There is a very good reason no one is ordering it. The fact that it is similarly sized to a 767, and closer to the -400 than the -300 doesn't mean it is the optimal replacement for those jets. The A338 is a shrink of the A339 to give it more range. Same is true of the A332 and the only reason NW ordered them is because they needed more range than the original PW powered 323's could provide. The 763 is a stretch of the original 762 which also sold poorly, relative to the 300. The 787-9 (not 900) is also a stretch of the -8 which, once again is not the version that Boeing is selling lots of these days. We also don't necessarily need a like for like replacemnt of the 767 for every route it flies. Int'l markets are growing, not contracting. Up gauging is likely going to be the way we continue to serve them.

crazyjaydawg

There is still a lot of motivation for Delta to maintain P2P flights, especially to stay competitive in NYC. New Yorkers can get a direct flight to almost anywhere, Delta needs to meet that demand to some of the bigger, more popular destinations.

Also double connecting US traffic via CDG or AMS loses customers due to timing and is putting NPS in other carriers’ hands; just like the RJ fiasco. BLUF: not very premium.

A332s have some of the highest CASM of all wide bodies. My understanding is that the A339 matches CASM with the B763, but can command a 25% higher PRASM with more premium and total seats. Essentially, if it can support an -ER, then it can support an A339, that will likely make more money.

A338 has almost the same exact operating costs as the A339. There was a proposal from Airbus to make an A338 lite for short/medium range, high frequency ops, but neither Japanese nor American carriers showed much interest.

Vsop

I’ve always thought the same. To me a 330-800 configured with a large percentage of premium seating could make a lot of sense.

I’ve read a few articles about how the cost to operate a -800 are slightly less than the 330-900, but not enough less to justify leaving the -900’s potential extra revenue. Most articles conclude that the -800 only makes sense for routes that only require its smaller passenger load.

Enter the marketing department’s belief that they can “right size” equipment to a route. They have said in the past that the reason for multiple overlapping fleets is their ability to sharp shoot an airframe to route extremely precisely. The smaller seat count in the -800 also works well with the Delta philosophy of higher prices through limiting capacity.

Adding to that right sized argument is the random one off routes that require more performance than anything other than the now ordered 350-1000, 777 or maybe a 787-8/9 can do. The 330-800 has roughly a 1000NM range advantage compared to the -900, that kind of range advantage should mean better hot/high performance as it should need to lift less fuel for a given route.

Lastly the 330-800 is a Delta favorite nearly orphaned aircraft. I think Airbus has sold less than 10 of them.

FangsF15

At approximately 22:30 through 23:50 of the webcast, The questioner from Deutsche Bank asked "will you have to extend your 767 fleet? I know that was going to be fully retired by I think it was 2025..." And asking about investing in extending the older aircraft until we take deliveries of new airplanes past 2025.

The CFO, DJ said as we move though 2025 through the back half of the decade, we expect to retire the 767-300's on a pretty consistent basis while continuing to fly the -400's. The questioner followed up with a question "so you'll continue to fly the -400's past 2025?" GH stepped in and said "there was never a plan to have that fleet grounded by 25, it was our intent to have them out of international long haul by 2028 and retired by 2030. To which the questioner said, "that makes sense, they are a bit younger".

It's hard to tell if GH was responding to the -300 or the -400 in his answer. But the statement was made in follow up specifically asking about the -400. If I had to guess, I'd say your interpretation is right/what was meant, but that's not what was said.

PilotBases

But they leave the tools to DIY.

https://www.seattletimes.com/busines...manufacturing/

tunes

at this point, no way we are getting those.

170Till5

A339 order would have been announced today as well if we were getting those.. they’re an older design, 787 adds fleet diversity, lower cabin altitude for pax comfort, better at hauling cargo… and cheaper airplane than the 339. 339 is a short term solution for Delta, there’s a reason it’s not in high demand

artlight

Reuters has it as of 30 minutes ago:

https://www.reuters.com/business/aer...in%20in%202026.

FangsF15

I'm not sure of that at all.

For DL, that's a detractor

And that's a plus, as they'll be cheaper.