Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
04-12-2010, 09:02 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2009
Posts: 710
My bet is grab used 320s if push comes to shove. Especially if Airbus comes out with a mod to current 320s. I mean Boeing was talking extending the nose wheel to get more efficient engines but I think the 320 can be tinkered with.
Actually, if we're grabbing "older" or no longer in production planes like a 90 then my bet is why not wait a few years and grab used 320s and 737s. By that time B&A might have announced their intent to look at a definite maybe possibly starting one day a 737/A320 replacement.
Also say fuel goes to $180bb and remains there but we can't raise prices. I'd like to think you'd see the complete elimination of 50-seaters and possibly keeping only some of the larger RJs and having larger aircraft flying routes with less frequency. Maybe or maybe not, I haven't thought that out yet.
Actually, if we're grabbing "older" or no longer in production planes like a 90 then my bet is why not wait a few years and grab used 320s and 737s. By that time B&A might have announced their intent to look at a definite maybe possibly starting one day a 737/A320 replacement.
Also say fuel goes to $180bb and remains there but we can't raise prices. I'd like to think you'd see the complete elimination of 50-seaters and possibly keeping only some of the larger RJs and having larger aircraft flying routes with less frequency. Maybe or maybe not, I haven't thought that out yet.
04-12-2010, 09:03 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: 765-A
Posts: 6,844
04-12-2010, 09:04 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
I am sure you are referring to the Super 98 Phase I and II mods. I believe phase 1 reveals a 4% fuel savings, that's what they pulled with the Airtran MD-80 anyway. The MDs will look strange with tail strakes. Phase II has not been certified yet.
Super98 > Products > MD-80
What are MD-88s powered by anyway, the same JT8D-219 as the MD-83?
What will hit the funny bone is Alaska pilots, west coast based, higher paid, with higher reserve guarantees and full pensions being integrated by third party arbitration into our narrow body list. Unless you are unGodly senior, standby.
Super98 > Products > MD-80
What are MD-88s powered by anyway, the same JT8D-219 as the MD-83?
What will hit the funny bone is Alaska pilots, west coast based, higher paid, with higher reserve guarantees and full pensions being integrated by third party arbitration into our narrow body list. Unless you are unGodly senior, standby.
No I was talking about this:
PICTURE: Dugan?s modified MD-80 reverser gets American scutiny
Future of the MD-80
Similar Aircraft Comparisons Chart
04-12-2010, 09:09 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
I put your name down New Know when asked where I had heard of that site. My inbox isn't working on the delta.com email but as soon as I see a password then I'll find out where I'll land and then I will proclaim that for the rest of my life as my right.
04-12-2010, 09:13 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Exactly my thought. While the CFM-56 is a fantastic engine, from the A318 to multiple 737's, it is over 20 years behind what GE is touting with their GENx engines. The Airbus seems to be an excellent candidate for an alternate, high-powered geared turbo fan with substantial fuel savings. Besides, passengers I fly with intentionally book the A320 out of LAX before other fleet types, they appreciate the few extra inches the 320 has over the 737 and 757 types. You'd be surprised, but our business passengers are on their game when it comes to these choices. I personally see the MD products and RJs as steps to the rear.
I don't know if Airbus, or why Airbus, would ever want to come up with an STC for better engines on the 320 other than to gain a larger market advantage over Boeing. Which might be worthwhile even if it sacrifices new aircraft orders in the short term.
04-12-2010, 09:18 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,574
You have valid points, but why then would AA be shelving MD-83s (former TWA were glass) and ordered over 140 NG 737s? With the economy on the fragile brink of recovery, oil already hovering near $90, the thought of anything narrow body powered by JT8D, yes the MD-90 is VM2500 (or whatever), is scary. If Douglas is the solution, why then to profitable airlines fly Boeing or Airbus? Why then did the A320/319 replace the 90 in SLC? Obviously more efficient, higher load and longer range. I'm sure the 90 has it's place, but up to what fuel price point. Certainly a dead goat at $100 a barrel or third world countries wouldn't be unloading them for Airbus orders themselves... There is something larger taking place here, it's not fDAL methodology.
The reason is that most of the numbers posted here are far from reality. There are so many issues with older airframes it just does not make sense to keep them for most airlines. In fact the smaller airlines that decided to go with new equipment have either done well or turned around such as Spirit and Jet Blue as examples of doing well and a turn around.
You have to deal with noise and slot issues, aging airframe inspections, increased overall maintenance costs before you even talk about fuel.
If you have a jet that is 30 percent more efficient on fuel the overall savings is enormous at 80 dollars a barrel and can easily pay the lease payment and more each month. The problem at Delta is management simply does not want a 100 seat aircraft. Its not coming and there wont be a purchase regardless of what we do with scope. They will mention it and really start to dangle it out there in the 2012 contract but in the end just like every other time the last 20 years the airframes wont show up.
04-12-2010, 09:19 PM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,037
FTB:
There is a good article in this month's ATW:
Countering the CSeries
By Aaron Karp and Geoffrey Thomas
Boeing and Airbus are under pressure to offer re-engined narrowbodies to match Bombardier's new jet. Engine makers say they can deliver the savings.
(Air Transport World, April 2010, p.22)
In this article a number of Airline Managers, including Southwest, say the 737 and A320 are not going to be competitive with the C Series and they will have to do something. The article discusses engine swap options.
I'd think a engine swap on an 88 would involve updating a lot of legacy systems. Assuming Boeing has nearly no interest in keeping that airframe flying, there would almost have to be an MRO operation willing to spend tens (maybe hundreds) of millions on development and testing. Given we are about the only carrier committed to keeping Douglas jets flying, I dunno if anyone would take the market risk.
When the C Series comes out, we'll be 3 generations behind with an airplane that costs at least twice as much to operate on a CASM basis.
It is smart for Delta's leadership to wait until the competitive response to the C Series gets more clear, but, I just don't see the JT8 powered jets being economically feasible.
I fear this is why we are getting all warm and fuzzy with a large 737 operator and the US launch customer for the C Series.
There is a good article in this month's ATW:
Countering the CSeries
By Aaron Karp and Geoffrey Thomas
Boeing and Airbus are under pressure to offer re-engined narrowbodies to match Bombardier's new jet. Engine makers say they can deliver the savings.
(Air Transport World, April 2010, p.22)
In this article a number of Airline Managers, including Southwest, say the 737 and A320 are not going to be competitive with the C Series and they will have to do something. The article discusses engine swap options.
I'd think a engine swap on an 88 would involve updating a lot of legacy systems. Assuming Boeing has nearly no interest in keeping that airframe flying, there would almost have to be an MRO operation willing to spend tens (maybe hundreds) of millions on development and testing. Given we are about the only carrier committed to keeping Douglas jets flying, I dunno if anyone would take the market risk.
When the C Series comes out, we'll be 3 generations behind with an airplane that costs at least twice as much to operate on a CASM basis.
It is smart for Delta's leadership to wait until the competitive response to the C Series gets more clear, but, I just don't see the JT8 powered jets being economically feasible.
I fear this is why we are getting all warm and fuzzy with a large 737 operator and the US launch customer for the C Series.
04-12-2010, 09:21 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
I have a question for Delta S pilots.
Why is it that when a union meeting reveals more domestic and international codeshare, S pilots get excited. For example, my good buddy at SWA couldn't be happier about parting ways with Westjet, yet union reps at Delta uphold codeshare as the holy grail of a business plan? Seriously guys, when does it benefit a pilots career to have another carrier, flying like equipment on former routes? If it were that great of a business model why do the most profitable airlines operate without RJ fleets or codeshare?
Maybe I am missing something here, but it seems the codeshare with Alaska, a higher cost per seat mile airline, is not the ultimate business solution. It only results in pilots getting kicked further east and bumping more junior pilots to lesser paid equipment. The company has been given entirely too much leeway on scope relief and I am one too few waiving the *** flag? Sure airlines like AA have furloughed thousands, but imagine if they weren't capped at 50 70-seat jets, AA would be a brand name only with 6,000 pilots. I hope our union figures this out before we all end up on the street pulling gear for another company going head to head with the Latest and Greatest Codeshare Giant.
Why is it that when a union meeting reveals more domestic and international codeshare, S pilots get excited. For example, my good buddy at SWA couldn't be happier about parting ways with Westjet, yet union reps at Delta uphold codeshare as the holy grail of a business plan? Seriously guys, when does it benefit a pilots career to have another carrier, flying like equipment on former routes? If it were that great of a business model why do the most profitable airlines operate without RJ fleets or codeshare?
Maybe I am missing something here, but it seems the codeshare with Alaska, a higher cost per seat mile airline, is not the ultimate business solution. It only results in pilots getting kicked further east and bumping more junior pilots to lesser paid equipment. The company has been given entirely too much leeway on scope relief and I am one too few waiving the *** flag? Sure airlines like AA have furloughed thousands, but imagine if they weren't capped at 50 70-seat jets, AA would be a brand name only with 6,000 pilots. I hope our union figures this out before we all end up on the street pulling gear for another company going head to head with the Latest and Greatest Codeshare Giant.
04-12-2010, 09:21 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2009
Posts: 710
I've never had the opportunity to fly on the 320 but I've been on plenty of 737s, 757s, Rjs and MD88s/717s. Width wise give me the Ejet followed by the MD88 followed by the 757/737 fuselage followed by a Honda Civic and then a Mazda Miata (sp?) then the RJ.
I don't know if Airbus, or why Airbus, would ever want to come up with an STC for better engines on the 320 other than to gain a larger market advantage over Boeing. Which might be worthwhile even if it sacrifices new aircraft orders in the short term.
I don't know if Airbus, or why Airbus, would ever want to come up with an STC for better engines on the 320 other than to gain a larger market advantage over Boeing. Which might be worthwhile even if it sacrifices new aircraft orders in the short term.
04-12-2010, 09:34 PM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,037
The reason is that most of the numbers posted here are far from reality. There are so many issues with older airframes it just does not make sense to keep them for most airlines. In fact the smaller airlines that decided to go with new equipment have either done well or turned around such as Spirit and Jet Blue as examples of doing well and a turn around.
You have to deal with noise and slot issues, aging airframe inspections, increased overall maintenance costs before you even talk about fuel.
If you have a jet that is 30 percent more efficient on fuel the overall savings is enormous at 80 dollars a barrel and can easily pay the lease payment and more each month. The problem at Delta is management simply does not want a 100 seat aircraft. Its not coming and there wont be a purchase regardless of what we do with scope. They will mention it and really start to dangle it out there in the 2012 contract but in the end just like every other time the last 20 years the airframes wont show up.
You have to deal with noise and slot issues, aging airframe inspections, increased overall maintenance costs before you even talk about fuel.
If you have a jet that is 30 percent more efficient on fuel the overall savings is enormous at 80 dollars a barrel and can easily pay the lease payment and more each month. The problem at Delta is management simply does not want a 100 seat aircraft. Its not coming and there wont be a purchase regardless of what we do with scope. They will mention it and really start to dangle it out there in the 2012 contract but in the end just like every other time the last 20 years the airframes wont show up.
Are they still telling stories about Delta Express?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
