The A330-300 burns less fuel than the A330-900 on routes under 2000 miles.

 

And….tomorrow night’s Joburg to ATL flight will be stopping in San Juan for gas.
Maybe Delta should just put a 350 crew base there!
It’s going to be a long winter for the 350 trying to go nonstop to ATL as Joburg gets into their hotter summer months soon.
Should be lots of 2 day SJU trips hitting open time all winter though, which is nice!

 

Another point with respect to United and their 787-9 is that they only put 257 seats into it. By comparison, AA puts 285 in theirs and we have 306 in our 350s which is slightly larger than the 787-9. Moreover, on the longest routes that United flies its 789s, even they take payload restrictions, I believe. The 283 tonne A359 is supposed to be the answer to our operational issues with the 350 fleet. Look for it in 2024. Until then, I do believe everything we are taking delivery of is 280 tonnes; not sure about the used birds though.

As far as LAX-SYD, its not that the plane struggled to get there from LAX, it was that we only had basically one viable alternate for SYD that required a lot of fuel and therefore a payload restriction as well. I believe that situation has long since been resolved and we operate the flight with a closer alternate now, plus a 280 tonne bird, so SYD isnt an issue anymore, I dont think.

 

This is true due to the 339's heavier weight and bigger engines causing more drag. But I think most intl routes that they are regularly used on are greater than 2000nm.

 

It's not a theatre dominator by any means. But it will throw a glut of premium (and coach) seats all over whatever routes it can do. Add up the number of FC and coach seats per year from JB and you can't deny the significant impact that will have on yields. That's the point.

Competing with like metal or not also isn't the point. Sometimes loss leaders have to be fought with more severe loss leaders because sometimes you have to spend money to make money. Allowing a competitor to poach anything off your menu they want on their terms whenever they want to "preserve yields" is guaranteed to be a losing stratedgy.

 

You're not wrong, but in the major markets that matter, like London for example there is also the question of slots, of which they have very few. Other markets of importance to us like AMS and CDG, it simply wont be competitive or of significant quantity to affect us or the other major players that much. Im not suggesting that we should ignore them entirely, but I think we'd have more to worry about if B6 bought A330's.

 

While I agree with your points, Delta can help fight the loss leaders with their own platforms. That’s where our 321Ns will help, it’s a lot easier for Delta to switch between 330s and 321Ns to chase the high/low demand seasons than it is for JB.

Hypothetically we could run 330s on BOS-DUB in the summer when demand is high and then in the winter shift those to DTW-CUN and the 32Ns could do the opposite.

It will be tough for JB to stay too long unless they start getting bigger planes. <200 pax per flight year round is just not a recipe for success. This has been proven time and time again, doesn’t matter if it’s premium focused or value focused. It just doesn’t work in the long run. It can cause a lot of damage to the yields and market in general though.

 

I'm not against DL getting 321N's or running them on some TA routes, regularly or seasonally. Whatever it takes to wage a war of mutuallu assured destruction. Your point about JB not truly making it to "the bigs" WRT TA flying until they get widebodies is duly noted. That's why this little foray needs to be nipped in the bud now, at whatever the cost, because the cost later will be higher and we will pay it for longer. Quarter to quarter EPS bonus psychology is fertile soil for them (and others) to get a nose under the tent that turns into a herd of camels one day.

Ignoring the severe long term threat just because its "just" a NB or they "only" have so many slots isn't the point. It would be enough of a threat if it was just 28" pitch coach supersavers with no meal service. But its a good coach product along with a premium lay flat product as well. Downplaying the severity of the threat in a lame attempt to buff near term margins is a strategic blunder that I hope we're not making. Time will tell.

 

The 350 bunk is fine.

<------ I sleep like this guy.

 

Looks like summer ops are going to be very restricted. Latest fuel stop flight had over 80 empty seats. Even the future 283 ton version would not have come close with a full load.