717 phase out?
 

Riding the JS a few days ago, the captain (an LCA) was saying that he thinks the 717 will be phased out in the next 6 years due to leases expiring and fleet plans shifting. Any truth or plausible scenario where this is true?

I know DL doesn’t own them, but they usually operate an older fleet historically.

We flew with a Tech Ops manager riding the jumpseat that stated the current plan was to be done with the 717 in 2025 so that sounds right for now...

Shifting to C-series? Did AT own their 717s, or did they simply subleased them to Delta?

Southwest inherited them from AT and Delta got them on a screaming lease deal from SWA. Then I think Delta bought some more. I don’t know who actually owns them all of them.

Denny

We lease the majority of our 717s from AirTran/SWA via the merger between the two and their desire for a single fleet type.

These planes in 2025 are due to go back to Boeing. The biggest cost on them is the engine overhaul that takes place overseas (New Zeland comes to mind). The cost to add RNP to these is almost $2mil per plane as well. So they will consolidate to ATL over the coming years.

I think whether they’re gone or not depends on the A220 and our next PWA with respect to large RJ flying.

According to latest 10k filing, Delta owns 3, Finance Leases 16, and Operate Leases 72.

Could that be Delta has 72 on operating leases?

Yes...I Grammer not so gooder.

For those asking “what’s the difference?”:

Operating lease is treated generally like renting. That means, the lease payments are treated as operating expenses and the asset does not show on the balance sheet. A financial lease is treated like a loan. Here, the asset ownership is considered by the lessee and so asset appears on the balance sheet.

88 we're from SW/AirTran. The 3 owned came later from Blue1. Those 3 are parked.

I see us continuing upguaging to the 220-300 and replacing the entire fleet. As stated, bottom end scope must remain tight or we could see some block hours on the 717/221 get replaced by E175s/CR9s. We'll already have 50 76-seat RJ hulls flying with 70 seats, awaiting conversion.

When did they get parked? I just flew one a few weeks ago. They are the ones with the Autobrakes panel (deactivated of course).

As soon as lease is over, which I heard is 3-4 years from now, Delta will park all 717s. This was determined almost 2 years ago between Delta and FAA CMO.

May have been winter schedule temporary park.

Been on the M88/90 and now the 717. Time for the T-Tails to die.

In a LUV SEC filing a while back, the remaining note was something like $17 million per plane after 2025. No way Delta would pay that with the price of a new A220 being less than $30 million.(number from the Boeing lawsuit)

I'd agree with that as long as that price holds. But what will the pricing effect be of that many 717's instantly dumped on the market? I doubt the few existing 717 operators will have anywhere remotely close to the demand level to make an upward dent in the pricing power of those very used, very orphaned planes. Sure Hawaiian may want a few and the occasional micro ULCC somewhere, but not nearly 100 of them.

There may be a very realistic price point by then for most of them that would still entice DL to keep them.

Exactly. Delta does not want to give UAL or AMR a plane that they can use to level the playing field in the 110 seat market. So I would be very surprised to see DAL let these hit the open market.

I could see these being earmarked in a 737/797/etc order in the future. Having said that, direct from the horses mouth these are PLANNED to be out of service in 2025. Just like the MD88 fleet was supposed to wind down by the end of 2017. So the “we are parking them in 3-4 years” is not accurate per the base visit presentation in Dec/Jan.

This would be a good thing to cover in one of your skyhub videos if any of you use that (I do not).

The engine manufactures are backing out of the 797, Rolls is out, so is GE, Pratt says maybe a GTF at 45k lbs, but not till 2030ish. The engine is too expensive to produce.

I think Delta is done with Boeing for a while.

The 3 parked 717's come back soon. Pulled for seasonal slowdown and keeping engines at reduced hours.

Only one I saw that was out was Rolls. Are the other ones newly out?

I think the 717s give Delta a strong competitive advantage against AA and UAL right now. Especially vs the RJs. However in 5 years if UAL or United want to grab these and put them up against the vast fleet of A220s Delta will have I think management will say be my guest.

Sent from my SM-G975U1 using Tapatalk

Pratt is still in it, GE will not participate unless they are the single supplier. GE/CFM needs a clean slate design that will take a decade or more. Rolls has stated they have too many problems with their current engines to develop a new program. Really, the only option Boeing has is a scaled up, 45K GTF from Pratt. I don't think it's going to happen, not anytime soon. If BA wants to get something out by 2025, then it has to be a 767 Max neo, or some other gimmick with what they currently have.



With the criminal investigation into the 737MAX, now would be the time for Airbus to move on the A220-500, and Delta to replace the MDs/717 with that plane, along with the A223. The 737Max is going to take a performance hit as a result of the criminal investigation. The FAA would have rubber-stamped the changes to the MCAS, as Boeing is bribing the FAA, there has to be something more going on there.

Agreed. The 220-500 would be the perfect next gen 7377 replacement and help with fleet commonality.

EB mentioned the A220-500 by name. He mentioned low CASM and that DL wanted them if Airbus decides on it.

Source????

Spitballin' but.....Ed Bastian? 😁

Skyhub. Select group: Events Expressway. Use search function: Leadership Engagement Series. Choose video on Feb 13th. View starting at 45:07-47:16. :)

Really good Canabus info

I’m not questioning your info. I sincerely would like to know where you get your information about the latest developments, is it available on a website somewhere? I am interested in this kind of news.

Now THAT was funny!

The Seattle times is following the story closely.

If it could e a 767 NEO it could be a 797, you already said that the problem is engines in that thrust class?

Maybe we could just get new 767's in the UPS configuration....with the lav in the cockpit, and 4 jumpseats!

Info on this site is akin to this:

“Um, he's sick. My best friend's sister's boyfriend's brother's girlfriend heard from this guy who knows this kid who's going with the girl who saw Ferris pass out at 31 Flavors last night. I guess it's pretty serious.”

Written document from said source or video where I hear the words out of their mouth is what I trust.

You are a funny guy! 😎

Thanks Saturn! Time to fire up the SkyHub account!

Boeing sent out an RFP for a 45K-50K lbs engine with less than 7000lbs dry weight, and is a minimum 25% more fuel efficient than the Pratt PW2000. That means the 797 would be smaller than 767, but slightly larger than a 757. If they simply re-engine the 767, it would be cheaper to keep it a 767, than certify a new airplane the same size as a 767. It's definitely feasible to build the 797, the problem is the engine manufactures will take 10 years to get that clean slate engine, that was requested in the RFP. Boeing could simply go with the current Pratt PW2000, but the A321XLR would destroy it in operating costs.

The original 767-300 operated with 48,000 lbs of thrust. With better wings and reductions in weight I suspect 45 to 50,000 lbs of thrust would allow a 767-300 sized airframe while maintaining the range of the 767-300 ER.

If they have a new engine for the size class of a 767, they could make a 797 with it. The whole point was the engine doesn't exist. An engine that does exist would still be more efficient on a new composite airframe than keeping the 767, which as you said would not be efficient enough.

Aren’t the 767 and 787 virtually the same size? BA wouldn’t want to build a cheap 767NEO if it was a sales threat to the 787.

They are. The 797 is supposed to be a shorter range aircraft than a 787. the 787 doesn't have much different fuel burn on short to mid range flights because of weight to carry the long range load.

Great vid, thanks!

They are not. The 787-800 seats more than the 767-300 and has a almost 100,000 lb higher gross weight. The 787-900 which is what should be compared to the 767-300 ER seats substantially more and has almost 150,000 lb higher takeoff weight.