Originally Posted by
Wasatch Phantom
This is so true.
Case in point: The infamous MD-11. Carriers that were serious about US to Asia service bought the 747-400. Delta (under Ron Allen's "leadership") went with the MD-11 as it was cheaper.
So how did that work out? It didn't live up to the range/performance guarantees from McDonnell Douglas (are you stunned?) which required additional fuel stops.
...You buy a ticket on Delta to fly nonstop to Tokyo and then the pilots make a PA saying "sorry folks we've got to stop for fuel and we'll be an hour or two late". Meanwhile your buddies (who booked on UAL or NWA) flew in a 747 and made it all the way. Would you book on Delta the next time?
My viewpoint is if Delta goes with the iPad instead of some "el-cheapo" alternative (that the manufacturer claims is just as good) that would signify a shift in management philosophy about looking for "value" instead of "price".
The fuel stops were urban legend on the MD11. It never stopped for fuel going to Tokyo. The stops made were crew swaps in PDX when they did not have a bunked aircraft for the over 12 flights. It stopped perhaps half a dozen times during the LAX-Hong Kong operation however every time we stopped the Cathy 747 on the route stopped also.