Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
12-18-2010, 07:54 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2009
Posts: 917
12-18-2010, 07:59 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2009
Posts: 917
12-18-2010, 08:02 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2009
Posts: 917
Sign me up for some trash talking, USAir kicking LeMon's racing!!
12-18-2010, 09:24 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Boeing Hearing and Ergonomics Lab Rat, Night Shift
Posts: 1,724
It makes you wonder if Delta says this publically imagine what they're saying behind closed doors? They've got to be frustrated with Boeing considering their needs and that Boeing is dragging its feet. Maybe it's like those mortgage commercials where the bank is shocked that they have to compete for their customers business? I guess since they gave us the 737 42 years ago, 747 40 years ago and 756 almost 30 years ago that they have the midas touch and can do no wrong?
I just hope this is a study and Boeing isn't serious about this:
(Look at the bulge for the lengthened gear to clear the large diameter fan of the GTF)
Cheers
George
Last edited by georgetg; 12-18-2010 at 09:45 PM. Reason: fix the picture
12-18-2010, 09:41 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Boeing Hearing and Ergonomics Lab Rat, Night Shift
Posts: 1,724
Trust me George I know. RA stopped dogging the GTF's a little over a year ago. The change did not go unnoticed by me.
I fleet of the 320 series makes a lot sense for a lot of flying we do. the 321 is not a 757 though. I suspect that 15% is good but absent a clean sheet design we will probably shy away from signing on to fleet renewal with the current generation of jets. Maintaining or growing a given fleet, yes, but not total replacement.
With the amount of jets we need and the varied missions there is not fleet that meets all of the needs that will compete with the next get stuff. A re-engineing of the 320 makes good sense, but I do not know if DAL would sign on to replace the entire narrow body fleet for the savings touted.
Either way, talking of new jets is good. Signing on the dotted line for new or used growth jets is better!
I fleet of the 320 series makes a lot sense for a lot of flying we do. the 321 is not a 757 though. I suspect that 15% is good but absent a clean sheet design we will probably shy away from signing on to fleet renewal with the current generation of jets. Maintaining or growing a given fleet, yes, but not total replacement.
With the amount of jets we need and the varied missions there is not fleet that meets all of the needs that will compete with the next get stuff. A re-engineing of the 320 makes good sense, but I do not know if DAL would sign on to replace the entire narrow body fleet for the savings touted.
Either way, talking of new jets is good. Signing on the dotted line for new or used growth jets is better!
The EIS for the 320neo is 2016, the 321neo is probably not until 2017.
DAL has the worlds largest Airbus fleet right now, that makes it easy to get good pricing...
The 320neo family is a wet dream for a network guy who can mix and match planes and routes domestically.
The 757 ETOPs birds have a secure future as the 321neo cant even come close in range and falls short on passenger lift.
The old and new strategy served NW well and I'd imagine RA will stick with some of that...
I just hope were're not looking at trading in 7ER rates and replace them with our current 320 rates to fly the potential 757 trans-con replacement.
Right now is a good time to place orders and "get in on the ground floor when prices are low" then take delivery 6 years from now at a great discount...
Cheers
George
12-18-2010, 10:56 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,544
Maybe it would if everything else were exactly equal, or at least within that cost range, but I highly doubt that is the case.
As for the 320 NEO, I doubt Boeing will (or can) come up with much more than 15% more efficient than the existing 320. If they barely exceed that, Airbus still wins big by offering a likely still common fleet with existing 320's both now and during a long future phase out period. Not to mention the 330 and maybe even the 350 (assuming they get it right and in our lifetimes) would be an added, massive bonus.
Boeing has fumbled on their own one yard line and turned the ball over regarding common cockpit while they were tripping all over themselves stroking off Southwest and Airbus may be about to score all over them and their stoopid tugboat control wheels. Of course that assumes they can convert in the red zone. They've been known to fumble a time or two as well. Either way competition is good for us, and its no longer limited to 2 or 3 legacy manufacturers.
12-18-2010, 11:41 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Boeing Hearing and Ergonomics Lab Rat, Night Shift
Posts: 1,724
I like where your head's at...you always gotta be watching your six around the boardroom types and all that...but I seriously doubt a multibillion dollar decades long fleet planning decision will hinge on the roughly 15-20 bucks per hour differential in total flight crew costs between 7ER and 320 rates.
It's not Delta management I'm worried about ;-)
There's good precedent, and there's bad.
When it comes to rates, I hope it's handled more like the 757/767 and 73NG 700/800 where the lower rate was adjusted up to match the higher rate.
Cheers
George
12-19-2010, 04:57 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,919
12-19-2010, 05:28 AM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
George;
The 320 Neo is a half step to where the airlines want their efficiency to be. It is an awesome start, but the Next Gen jets that both of these carriers have been talking about need to be clean sheet designs.
Basically what the 320NEO is, is a Bigger C-Series. It would work well in DAL's fleet since it could be flown by 320 pilots, but I am not convinced that DAL would commit that amount of CAPEX given their discipline. I can see DAL getting Airbus to commit to retrofitting all of our existing 320's with GTF's and then buying a ton of used ones on the open market.
The MD-90 and renewed 88's are jets that can be here 15-20 more years. The low costs of ownership offset many of the other inefficiencies. Bar is correct that there are a "few" 757's that will have to leave the fleet around 2020, but not all of em. Some of the 320's will time out too, but it is very possible to deal with these needs in the used aircraft market.
If DAL commits to a large Narrow body aircraft order wit the 320 Neo, I will be surprised. Of course if Airbus darn near give us the jets for free, yep, I can see us jumping on that. It take my previous argument and throws it out the window!
The 320 Neo is a half step to where the airlines want their efficiency to be. It is an awesome start, but the Next Gen jets that both of these carriers have been talking about need to be clean sheet designs.
Basically what the 320NEO is, is a Bigger C-Series. It would work well in DAL's fleet since it could be flown by 320 pilots, but I am not convinced that DAL would commit that amount of CAPEX given their discipline. I can see DAL getting Airbus to commit to retrofitting all of our existing 320's with GTF's and then buying a ton of used ones on the open market.
The MD-90 and renewed 88's are jets that can be here 15-20 more years. The low costs of ownership offset many of the other inefficiencies. Bar is correct that there are a "few" 757's that will have to leave the fleet around 2020, but not all of em. Some of the 320's will time out too, but it is very possible to deal with these needs in the used aircraft market.
If DAL commits to a large Narrow body aircraft order wit the 320 Neo, I will be surprised. Of course if Airbus darn near give us the jets for free, yep, I can see us jumping on that. It take my previous argument and throws it out the window!
12-19-2010, 05:34 AM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
That's what happens when you forget about your own core-competencies and outsource the engineering to third parties...
I just hope this is a study and Boeing isn't serious about this:
(Look at the bulge for the lengthened gear to clear the large diameter fan of the GTF)
Cheers
George
I just hope this is a study and Boeing isn't serious about this:
(Look at the bulge for the lengthened gear to clear the large diameter fan of the GTF)
Cheers
George
George, it is a cheap way to compete with Airbus. Boeing has eked a about as much efficiency out of the 73N as the possible could. A new clean sheet airframe is what is needed.
I would like to see Boeing hang a GTF off the 757. It would be a great selling jet. Clean up some of the systems that add weight to the current generation, and you would have an awesome airplane. If I were king for a day, the 757 is the platform I would be using to design a narrow body jet for tomorrow's needs!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
