80ktsClamp

I know there has been specific interest in the C-series from Bombardier. It will be interesting to see how that turns out.

forgot to bid

I agree with all of the above.

The RAH 190 quesiton was the first in the Q&A. After the Q&A when there was time just to hang out and talk the person who asked that question went up and talked some more, I think he had a news article to back it up. I'd like to know more about what they talked about but I couldn't stay.

As to the C-Series and E-190, I was hoping it was just a lease term issue on the later as to why its not been ordered. But they said cargo capacity, cargo volume or performance was the issue on both. If thats the case, then it means what Embraer has and whats coming off the drawing board at Bombardier doesn't interest some at DAL. Funny thing, the E175 and CRJ900 interest them just fine.

I am looking at the asking price for these birds as of 2009... CRJ700 and 900 are $36.5M and $40.4M. The E175 and 190 are $33.5 and $37.5. Those numbers are far far from what you actually pay and everyone knows that but when you can buy used 5 MD-90s for the asking price of a CRJ900 then I can see how you've probably got to offer DAL a lot of incentive in this market to put cash into leases on new 100 seat birds from either B or E and neither have accomplished that sell. Anotherwords, it makes complete sense to get 100 seat mainline aircraft unless of course that same amount of money/investment/cash flow can make more money doing something else. But thats just my guess.

Bleedovertemp

Well now that the war or should I say the liberation to roll back your domestic pay checks again has begun, what are you going to do about it?

Answer: Nothing. We'll sit here and complain on this board and let the Company Union "McDonalize" this industry further.

Sarcasm over. Brothers ban together to stop this "contracting out" mainlline jobs. If the MEC doesn't do what you want, vote em' out until you find someone that does.

Tomcat

I just received the annual aircraft issue of National Business Aircraft Association Magazine (NBAA) and the prices you quote above are correct. I just want to add, before anyone says you can buy a 700 or 800 for that amount, the FULL price quoted for the 737-700 was $75M and for the 737-800 was $80M. They also had the 319/320 prices in this issue and they were in line with the above prices, but I don't recall exact figures off hand. We all know that Delta pays a fraction of the above prices.

It struck me that we could buy 2 190's for the price of one 800. Now I know there is so much more to consider when purchasing a piece of equipment, but I would be looking hard at the 190/195 or the C-series.

I'll just say that I believe there are other dynamics behind this "non decision". Perhaps it's buying time for negotiating power, perhaps these aircraft just are not what they want (they won't see a comparable a/c from Boeing or Airbus in there careers) or perhaps they see from a purely business perspective that it just doesn't make sense to have Delta pilots fly Delta aircraft. Perhaps it just doesn't make much sense to aircraft at all, just sell the seats. At the rate that Skywest has grown since I've been on the property, they could easily take over the remainder of the flying in the next decade. Maybe we keep the 777's & 787's for old times sake.

Free Bird

Don't wave the white flag just yet Mr. Cat. Remember Scope is only taken because WE give it away.

acl65pilot

Problem with all of these aircraft is the same. They are built from Metal. Last summer, June/July of 2008 AWST has an article stating that Airbus and Boeing do not see the composite technology improving to a point to work in a narrow body jet until the 2018 time frame. That is their new target launch date for these next gen jets.
That said, Airbus is toying with retrofitting the 320 series with the GTF.

What this means is there is no way Delta is going to purchase a very expensive asset that 1) They will get 1/2 of the min design life out of until it needs to be replaced to compete 2) Know it is going to be obsolete in less than 10 years, 3) Is a old design that is old now, but will be gone in 10 years.
DAL is playing a game. They want a ultra efficient narrow body jet. IMHO the reason they are skeptical of the C-Series is that the big boys say that the composites cannot work until 2012-2013 to start a design of a high frequency jet.
They will wait and see how the GTF works out on that design. That is the majority of where the efficiency will be coming from. If it does they will buy in. I am sure they want a Boeing or Airbus product, and as long as fuel does not go where it was, we will band aid the problem for a few more years.

forgot to bid

I wish I got that NBAA guide. I once heard the lease rates for XJT for its E145s and if they had gotten a standard lease rate the price was slightly less than half the asking price. Of course a year ago if you could find a used G550 you paid a few million over the new price, around $60-$65M, and a year and a half later you can buy low time 550s for $35M. Talk about taking a bath.

I'm curious about what AirTran paid for those TWA 717s and then for those 73Ns post 9/11. I heard they were as cheap as regional jets since they were the only ones growing after 9/11. Obviously there later purchases are not cheap enough since we evidently took a few of them from them.

If we didn't have DC-9s I wonder if they'd look harder at 100 seaters. And if we didn't have DC-9s and we didn't have 76 seaters then I think we'd be talking about whether they're going to add to the existing fleet of 200 E-190s we have on property.

Can't agree more. I wonder how far would they allow things to go if they weren't restricted? I'd optimistcally like to say the 767 fleet and up, maybe even the A320 and up.

forgot to bid

Which makes the lease agreement issue on the E190s the big issue, right? They don't want to have 190s when new technology comes in and Embraer doesn't want to have a fleet of 190s being dumped on them (i.e. the open market) in less than 20 years. Thus an impasse? Or is there more to it?

The one knock some airline analyst had on the C-Series was it wasn't a little 787, it was still older technology with a blend of some new. I think Bombardier is trying to do the best they can with technology they feel they can trust. We'll see if its enough and my bet is it is or will be darn close to whatever Boeing and Airbus come up with, but that might not be enough for DAL. I need to subscribe to Aviation Week, they probably have already explained all of this to the nth degree.

acl65pilot

I got the guide too. It is all published book prices. Also the bus jets do not include interiors.

Bucking Bar

I've been told we paid:
21m for CRJ-200
28m for CRJ-700
31m for E175
64m for 737

and AirTran bought 717's for 18m.

Other than AirTran's number, which got published, the other figures are rumors from 3 different airlines with no way of knowing whether they are true, or not. I'm guessing the 737 figure was for the 800, but do not know.

If the last 717's went for only 30% of the cost of a 737, then you sure understand why Boeing wanted that production line shut down.

In any event, ALPA's own economic analysis states says crew costs are insignificant to the cost of operating the airplane. Management says crew costs are one of the few variable costs that separate competitors.

I think if we ran the numbers, with all the inefficiencies, shareholder profits and duplication and lack of operational control, we would find it makes sense to bring flying back in house.

We really need to get ALPA to take a look at the economics of unity.