Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
12-19-2010 | 01:43 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,357
Likes: 0
Delta CEO wants re-engined 737, A320 | Puget Sound Business Journal
Delta Looks at Airbus A320 for Boeing-Dominated Fleet - BusinessWeek
Delta CEO Foresees Bright Future For 787 | AVIATION WEEK
In an interview this week with Aviation Week, CEO Richard Anderson said Delta doesn’t want to wait for the next generation of narrowbody aircraft.
Airbus said earlier this week it will offer new engines for its single-aisle A320 aircraft series that can increase fuel efficiency by 15 percent. The planes will be available in 2016 and will compete with Boeing’s narrow-body 737, the world’s most widely flown airliner.
“We wish Boeing would do the same, but it doesn’t look like the 737 will have much innovation in the coming years,” Anderson said. Atlanta-based Delta is the second-biggest U.S. airline.
12-19-2010 | 04:46 PM
Happy to be here
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 18,563
Likes: 0
From: A-320A
The 757 is a expensive jet to build. The 737-800 is 30 percent cheaper on a per trip basis to operate overall then the 757 with only 23 fewer seats. The production line for the 757 has been long since closed and updating the jet would not make sense.
Delta is not looking at near term jets. They are looking to 2020 and beyond and I would be surprised if anything other then MD90's show up in the next 10 years. What Delta is trying to do I think is push Boeing to go for a new clean sheet aircraft based off the 787 technology. Really looking at well after 2020 for those jets. Still if a all new jet is announced it puts Delta in a good place verses many other airlines. We will be in the cycle to replace our current jets vice stuck with jets that are still new but not up to the efficiency of a clean sheet aircraft.
If Boeing does not go for a new jet then Delta is now in a bad position. They will be faced with a fleet replacement requirement but will not gain the efficiencies they need. The airlines like AMR that are replacing their MD-80's now will end up with lower overall costs.
Timing is everything. Delta is trying to force the issue. The new jet has to come as close to 2020 as possible. Every year after that will cost Delta a lot of money.
Delta is not looking at near term jets. They are looking to 2020 and beyond and I would be surprised if anything other then MD90's show up in the next 10 years. What Delta is trying to do I think is push Boeing to go for a new clean sheet aircraft based off the 787 technology. Really looking at well after 2020 for those jets. Still if a all new jet is announced it puts Delta in a good place verses many other airlines. We will be in the cycle to replace our current jets vice stuck with jets that are still new but not up to the efficiency of a clean sheet aircraft.
If Boeing does not go for a new jet then Delta is now in a bad position. They will be faced with a fleet replacement requirement but will not gain the efficiencies they need. The airlines like AMR that are replacing their MD-80's now will end up with lower overall costs.
Timing is everything. Delta is trying to force the issue. The new jet has to come as close to 2020 as possible. Every year after that will cost Delta a lot of money.
Gotta disagree with you here.
The early 5500 and pre-ship 622 series 757's will be 30 years old in 2016. I don't believe these aircraft can be wingletted due to a different wing structure than later aircraft. Including those aircraft, there will be around 75 757's over 25 years old that year. The earliest A320's (about 18 a/c) will be over 25 years old. 89 of the MD-88 fleet will be 25 years or older, not to mention the age of the 34 DC-9-50's we still operate. 10 of the 16 744's will be over 25 years old, as will a number of 767 domestic and 767ER. While the MD-88's have fewer structural concerns, that's a lot of older airplanes. There's just over 100 MD-90's in the world, and we already own 49 of them according to CPO numbers. FedEx, UPS, and DHL are scarfing up all the low cycle 757's they can acquire on the used market and turning them into package freighters, making the used aircraft market pretty competitive.
I don't see how you make it to 2020 with just MD-90's. Pushing it out that far would make a huge CapEx hurdle during that decade as you tried to replace substantially all of our fleet over 10 years.
The early 5500 and pre-ship 622 series 757's will be 30 years old in 2016. I don't believe these aircraft can be wingletted due to a different wing structure than later aircraft. Including those aircraft, there will be around 75 757's over 25 years old that year. The earliest A320's (about 18 a/c) will be over 25 years old. 89 of the MD-88 fleet will be 25 years or older, not to mention the age of the 34 DC-9-50's we still operate. 10 of the 16 744's will be over 25 years old, as will a number of 767 domestic and 767ER. While the MD-88's have fewer structural concerns, that's a lot of older airplanes. There's just over 100 MD-90's in the world, and we already own 49 of them according to CPO numbers. FedEx, UPS, and DHL are scarfing up all the low cycle 757's they can acquire on the used market and turning them into package freighters, making the used aircraft market pretty competitive.
I don't see how you make it to 2020 with just MD-90's. Pushing it out that far would make a huge CapEx hurdle during that decade as you tried to replace substantially all of our fleet over 10 years.
True, but the 787's technology has not been validated. The replacement of traditional systems with an all electric airplane might not be such a great idea. For starters, no one has built the perfect relay. At 235 volts, any increase in resistance will generate a lot of heat.
Boeing has repeatedly said the electric tech does not scale down in cost or size for a 737 sized jet.
Boeing has repeatedly said the electric tech does not scale down in cost or size for a 737 sized jet.
You're statement doesn't mesh with what Anderson has said repeatedly in the past:
Delta CEO wants re-engined 737, A320 | Puget Sound Business Journal
Delta Looks at Airbus A320 for Boeing-Dominated Fleet - BusinessWeek
Delta CEO Foresees Bright Future For 787 | AVIATION WEEK
In an interview this week with Aviation Week, CEO Richard Anderson said Delta doesn’t want to wait for the next generation of narrowbody aircraft.
Airbus said earlier this week it will offer new engines for its single-aisle A320 aircraft series that can increase fuel efficiency by 15 percent. The planes will be available in 2016 and will compete with Boeing’s narrow-body 737, the world’s most widely flown airliner.
“We wish Boeing would do the same, but it doesn’t look like the 737 will have much innovation in the coming years,” Anderson said. Atlanta-based Delta is the second-biggest U.S. airline.
Delta CEO wants re-engined 737, A320 | Puget Sound Business Journal
Delta Looks at Airbus A320 for Boeing-Dominated Fleet - BusinessWeek
Delta CEO Foresees Bright Future For 787 | AVIATION WEEK
In an interview this week with Aviation Week, CEO Richard Anderson said Delta doesn’t want to wait for the next generation of narrowbody aircraft.
Airbus said earlier this week it will offer new engines for its single-aisle A320 aircraft series that can increase fuel efficiency by 15 percent. The planes will be available in 2016 and will compete with Boeing’s narrow-body 737, the world’s most widely flown airliner.
“We wish Boeing would do the same, but it doesn’t look like the 737 will have much innovation in the coming years,” Anderson said. Atlanta-based Delta is the second-biggest U.S. airline.
Improvements on existing jets makes sense. Stretch out the life of the ones you own, buy a few to replace the ones that must be replaced, and wait and spend you money on the true clean sheet jets that will inevitably come. The industry is demanding them so it is only a matter of time.
I would replace the ones I must, and get the efficiencies I can on the other ones, repair the balance sheet and sign on to the clean sheets that will arrive in a few years.
12-19-2010 | 06:40 PM
No longer cares
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,109
Likes: 0
From: 767er Captain
Wow.. I'm impressed.. ACL learned how to use the quote key 
12-19-2010 | 06:46 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 12,831
Likes: 172
From: window seat
So what is the WAG on efficiencies WRT "clean sheet" narrow bodies?
Wiki says that Boeing says that the 787 will be 20% more efficient than the 767. If the 320 NEO is 15% more efficient than the current 320/73N, just how much more is there to get even if they cloned/scaled the 787 to 737 size?
Common fleet, quicker availability and fewer things to go wrong versus a true "clean sheet" are very significant advantages. Also, where will fuel be in the late 20 teens? All signs point to nowhere for crude to go but up on a multitude of fronts from currency devaluation to global demand to geo-political restrictions to self imposed carbon based wealth redistribution schemes to name a few. Can we afford to sit on the sidelines and pass up 15% in the hopes that yet another paperware/vaporware jet to be named later comes along...and for what...that additional 5%, maybe?
I would not count out the 320NEO, especially if waiting on Boeing to make one based on what they have said about it. The 320 NEO, IMHO, is a very strong contender.
Wiki says that Boeing says that the 787 will be 20% more efficient than the 767. If the 320 NEO is 15% more efficient than the current 320/73N, just how much more is there to get even if they cloned/scaled the 787 to 737 size?
Common fleet, quicker availability and fewer things to go wrong versus a true "clean sheet" are very significant advantages. Also, where will fuel be in the late 20 teens? All signs point to nowhere for crude to go but up on a multitude of fronts from currency devaluation to global demand to geo-political restrictions to self imposed carbon based wealth redistribution schemes to name a few. Can we afford to sit on the sidelines and pass up 15% in the hopes that yet another paperware/vaporware jet to be named later comes along...and for what...that additional 5%, maybe?
I would not count out the 320NEO, especially if waiting on Boeing to make one based on what they have said about it. The 320 NEO, IMHO, is a very strong contender.
12-19-2010 | 06:50 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 467
Likes: 0
From: SLC ERB
Now in the case of a relay, true, the higher voltage can lead to greater arcing between the contacts, which in turn can lead to carbon build up and increased resistance. But, the heat generated across that resistance will still only depend on the current flowing across the resistance. One the circuit is made, the actual voltage that the relay is operating at becomes pretty much a non issue.
If you had said that at any fixed resistance, an increase in the voltage would result in an increase in current and therefore heat, you would be spot on. But an increase in resistance for any fixed voltage (wether it be 120 volts, 240 volts or 2400 volts) actually results in a decrease in current and a corresponding decrease in heat (ohms law, I = E/R. As R gets bigger, I, current, gets smaller)
I'm not an electrical engineer, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
Last edited by Dash8widget; 12-19-2010 at 07:12 PM.
12-19-2010 | 06:58 PM
Moderator
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,088
Likes: 0
From: B757/767
Nevermind. Found the answer. Thanks.
Last edited by johnso29; 12-19-2010 at 07:19 PM.
12-19-2010 | 07:10 PM
Happy to be here
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 18,563
Likes: 0
From: A-320A
ACL likes "Multi-quote"
What the two major aircraft makers have been saying for a 787/350 type of narrow body clean sheet design is a 20-25% (min) improvement over current models. The composite type barrel that is used on the wb jets needs to be improved on a little more for it to have the durability for a nb jet. (cycle life) If they can get there, they are looking at airframes that do not have corrosion issues, and well as a magnatiude of other benefits. The other components need to mature a little more as well. Boeing and Airbus say that the technology will mature enough to make a viable design in the 2015-2017 time frame with deliveries after 2020.
5-10% (min) improvements may not seem like a lot, but remember that these are all guesses, and if they are better, no airline can afford to be wrong on them. Owning jets that miss this mark will require airlines to reinvest to keep up. The benefits of buying cheap will not be there when comparing the reworked 73N and the 320 compared to the clean sheet composites.
I do agree that the 320 will probably win out on a 73N Neo since the 73N requires some structural work to make the GTF work, whereas the 320 requires almost none.
So what is the WAG on efficiencies WRT "clean sheet" narrow bodies?
Wiki says that Boeing says that the 787 will be 20% more efficient than the 767. If the 320 NEO is 15% more efficient than the current 320/73N, just how much more is there to get even if they cloned/scaled the 787 to 737 size?
Common fleet, quicker availability and fewer things to go wrong versus a true "clean sheet" are very significant advantages. Also, where will fuel be in the late 20 teens? All signs point to nowhere for crude to go but up on a multitude of fronts from currency devaluation to global demand to geo-political restrictions to self imposed carbon based wealth redistribution schemes to name a few. Can we afford to sit on the sidelines and pass up 15% in the hopes that yet another paperware/vaporware jet to be named later comes along...and for what...that additional 5%, maybe?
I would not count out the 320NEO, especially if waiting on Boeing to make one based on what they have said about it. The 320 NEO, IMHO, is a very strong contender.
Wiki says that Boeing says that the 787 will be 20% more efficient than the 767. If the 320 NEO is 15% more efficient than the current 320/73N, just how much more is there to get even if they cloned/scaled the 787 to 737 size?
Common fleet, quicker availability and fewer things to go wrong versus a true "clean sheet" are very significant advantages. Also, where will fuel be in the late 20 teens? All signs point to nowhere for crude to go but up on a multitude of fronts from currency devaluation to global demand to geo-political restrictions to self imposed carbon based wealth redistribution schemes to name a few. Can we afford to sit on the sidelines and pass up 15% in the hopes that yet another paperware/vaporware jet to be named later comes along...and for what...that additional 5%, maybe?
I would not count out the 320NEO, especially if waiting on Boeing to make one based on what they have said about it. The 320 NEO, IMHO, is a very strong contender.
5-10% (min) improvements may not seem like a lot, but remember that these are all guesses, and if they are better, no airline can afford to be wrong on them. Owning jets that miss this mark will require airlines to reinvest to keep up. The benefits of buying cheap will not be there when comparing the reworked 73N and the 320 compared to the clean sheet composites.
I do agree that the 320 will probably win out on a 73N Neo since the 73N requires some structural work to make the GTF work, whereas the 320 requires almost none.
12-19-2010 | 07:58 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,724
Likes: 0
From: Boeing Hearing and Ergonomics Lab Rat, Night Shift
ACL likes "Multi-quote"
What the two major aircraft makers have been saying for a 787/350 type of narrow body clean sheet design is a 20-25% (min) improvement over current models. The composite type barrel that is used on the wb jets needs to be improved on a little more for it to have the durability for a nb jet. (cycle life) If they can get there, they are looking at airframes that do not have corrosion issues, and well as a magnatiude of other benefits. The other components need to mature a little more as well. Boeing and Airbus say that the technology will mature enough to make a viable design in the 2015-2017 time frame with deliveries after 2020.
5-10% (min) improvements may not seem like a lot, but remember that these are all guesses, and if they are better, no airline can afford to be wrong on them. Owning jets that miss this mark will require airlines to reinvest to keep up. The benefits of buying cheap will not be there when comparing the reworked 73N and the 320 compared to the clean sheet composites.
I do agree that the 320 will probably win out on a 73N Neo since the 73N requires some structural work to make the GTF work, whereas the 320 requires almost none.
What the two major aircraft makers have been saying for a 787/350 type of narrow body clean sheet design is a 20-25% (min) improvement over current models. The composite type barrel that is used on the wb jets needs to be improved on a little more for it to have the durability for a nb jet. (cycle life) If they can get there, they are looking at airframes that do not have corrosion issues, and well as a magnatiude of other benefits. The other components need to mature a little more as well. Boeing and Airbus say that the technology will mature enough to make a viable design in the 2015-2017 time frame with deliveries after 2020.
5-10% (min) improvements may not seem like a lot, but remember that these are all guesses, and if they are better, no airline can afford to be wrong on them. Owning jets that miss this mark will require airlines to reinvest to keep up. The benefits of buying cheap will not be there when comparing the reworked 73N and the 320 compared to the clean sheet composites.
I do agree that the 320 will probably win out on a 73N Neo since the 73N requires some structural work to make the GTF work, whereas the 320 requires almost none.
There is no 757 replacement. Nothing comes close to payload/range
But as much as we might be fans of the 757 it's days in domestic service are numbered.
The ETOPS 757 on the other hand will remain in DALs fleet in niche transatlantic service for the next 10-15 years.
The 321neo is a gamechanger....
The 321 with sharklets already offers a 17%/seat fuel burn advantage over the existing 757-200; that's already massive.
The 320neo family will offer an additional 10-16% improvement over that with the PTW1000 (GTF) or the CFM LEAP-X.
The 321neo will offer a nearly 30% fuel burn advantage/seat over the existing 757, this is a no-brainer, there is no need to wait for a clean sheet design.
The 321neo with sharklets can do full payload trans-cons and Hawaii from the West coast, it is a game changer.
In addition the MRO expenses on the 321 are not much over the existing 320 family below the 757, offering additional savings.
Why should all this matter to us as a pilot group?
It's not about Boeing vs Airbus as much as it's about shifting a significant portion of the 7ER flying to the lower rungs of the payscale.
The 7ER category will shrink significantly with the introduction of the 321neo. I only bring this up because as a pilot group we need to be aware of this big shift that is coming our way.
I wouldn't hold my breath on the C-series, the fuselage is still aluminum and the wing composite, It's not that much different from existing designs and will be capital-intensive for the mission it serves, that's why DAL is getting MD90s...
Cheers
George
12-19-2010 | 08:37 PM
Da Hudge
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,473
Likes: 0
From: Poodle Whisperer
Agreed all around, George. Perhaps another reason to have our pay tables not delinated by type but by larger categories next round?
I am all for something similar to the small narrowbody, large narrowbody, widebody, premium widebody, and SUPER premium widebody ( )... (note there is no such thing as a small widebody!).
Or perhaps short range narrowbody, long range narrowbody, short range widebody, long range widebody, ULR widebody??
Thinking out loud here...
The key is that the company is probably going to come running asking for some sort of relief, and 1. we have to hold the line, and 2. we have to plan ahead for the coming large fleet replacement with next gen engines, wings, and tubes (current 737 cockpit need not apply... for the love of pete update that thing!)
Edit: notice how RJ wasn't in there? those are just short range narrowbodies. bring them on!)
I am all for something similar to the small narrowbody, large narrowbody, widebody, premium widebody, and SUPER premium widebody (
)... (note there is no such thing as a small widebody!). Or perhaps short range narrowbody, long range narrowbody, short range widebody, long range widebody, ULR widebody??
Thinking out loud here...
The key is that the company is probably going to come running asking for some sort of relief, and 1. we have to hold the line, and 2. we have to plan ahead for the coming large fleet replacement with next gen engines, wings, and tubes (current 737 cockpit need not apply... for the love of pete update that thing!)
Edit: notice how RJ wasn't in there? those are just short range narrowbodies. bring them on!)
12-19-2010 | 09:10 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
From: Doing what you do, for less.
As far as pay rates, what Delta has now is way too complicated..... what I'd do....
4 categories, with overrides.
> 50-150 seats (mostly narrowbody north america flying)
> 150-250 seats (large domestic to europe and smaller asia flying)
> 250-350 seats (most large international flying)
> 350-450 seats (large long haul)
10% (or whatever you choose) override for international flying
20% (or whatever you choose) override for intercontinental flying
Of course, all these numbers could be tweaked to your pleasure. Theres no need for dozens of different pay scales, there are only 4 or so real categories of flying a major airline does. Alternatively, if you don't want to base it on seats (seat counts change, similar seating planes do different missions...), you could could make 4 MTOW categories and do the same sort of deal.
0-199k lb
200-349k lb
350-599k lb
600k+ lb
4 categories, with overrides.
> 50-150 seats (mostly narrowbody north america flying)
> 150-250 seats (large domestic to europe and smaller asia flying)
> 250-350 seats (most large international flying)
> 350-450 seats (large long haul)
10% (or whatever you choose) override for international flying
20% (or whatever you choose) override for intercontinental flying
Of course, all these numbers could be tweaked to your pleasure. Theres no need for dozens of different pay scales, there are only 4 or so real categories of flying a major airline does. Alternatively, if you don't want to base it on seats (seat counts change, similar seating planes do different missions...), you could could make 4 MTOW categories and do the same sort of deal.
0-199k lb
200-349k lb
350-599k lb
600k+ lb
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
