Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
08-23-2011, 02:25 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,388
I gotta agree with you on this Sailing. I have long thought that the 737-800 was our best 100 seat replacement. In effect for the same price as a 130 seat jet, you have the flexibility and efficiency to go from 100-152 seats with decent range, mx commonality, etc.
Then we merged with NW and the airbus showed up. The same arguement for the -800 goes for the airbus except it is also more comfortable in the back.
None of this takes a critical look at life cycle costs and I dont recall the efficiency comparison between the 73-8 and the 320/321.
If DAL can get a sweet deal on 717's (Airtran got AA's 717s for .60 cents on the dollar for a stock swap - so our deal would have to be way better today) and sort out the engine costs, I cant think of any reason to turn them away.
When is Boeing going to re-open the 757 line again?
Then we merged with NW and the airbus showed up. The same arguement for the -800 goes for the airbus except it is also more comfortable in the back.
None of this takes a critical look at life cycle costs and I dont recall the efficiency comparison between the 73-8 and the 320/321.
If DAL can get a sweet deal on 717's (Airtran got AA's 717s for .60 cents on the dollar for a stock swap - so our deal would have to be way better today) and sort out the engine costs, I cant think of any reason to turn them away.
When is Boeing going to re-open the 757 line again?
08-23-2011, 02:28 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,919
So the way I see it here is that the 739 is able to make the shorter hops up and down the east coast/in and out of hubs, while also having the capability to stretch out on a transcon more comfortably than the A320. Sound right?
I'm thinking this type of operational flexibility is something DAL is looking for.
I'm thinking this type of operational flexibility is something DAL is looking for.
08-23-2011, 02:42 AM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
the 320 is the more comfortable jet in the back.
08-23-2011, 03:08 AM
Line Holder
Joined APC: Mar 2010
Position: 765A
Posts: 98
So the way I see it here is that the 739 is able to make the shorter hops up and down the east coast/in and out of hubs, while also having the capability to stretch out on a transcon more comfortably than the A320. Sound right?
I'm thinking this type of operational flexibility is something DAL is looking for.
I'm thinking this type of operational flexibility is something DAL is looking for.
08-23-2011, 03:22 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,919
I'm just wondering if the 739 is that much more of a mission capable aircraft from an operational standpoint.
Is it more efficient? Can it carry a heavier load further than the 320?
I plead ignorance on this one, I spend most of my time just trying to figure out what the he11 the vnav is doing on the 88, so there isn't much time for anything else.
08-23-2011, 03:25 AM
Line Holder
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 29
I think the company knew it was going to order more 737's for a while. This may be why they have a guide for pilots going from the 320 to the 737.
08-23-2011, 03:41 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,388
The 320 is definitely a more comfortable plane, agree with you guys on that one. The 320 is really like having a first class seat in coach, much noticeable difference. Boeing hasn't seemed focused on making a little extra leg room or improving the cabin comfort in their designs, and I think that will ultimately hurt us on long-haul flights.
I'm just wondering if the 739 is that much more of a mission capable aircraft from an operational standpoint.
Is it more efficient? Can it carry a heavier load further than the 320?
I plead ignorance on this one, I spend most of my time just trying to figure out what the he11 the vnav is doing on the 88, so there isn't much time for anything else.
I'm just wondering if the 739 is that much more of a mission capable aircraft from an operational standpoint.
Is it more efficient? Can it carry a heavier load further than the 320?
I plead ignorance on this one, I spend most of my time just trying to figure out what the he11 the vnav is doing on the 88, so there isn't much time for anything else.
The 737-900ER however offers more range, payload and a lower fuel burn. The A321 can't make some of the flight segments Delta wanted with all the seats full. I guess we will know for sure what they have purchased in less then 2 weeks.
08-23-2011, 03:53 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Ain't that the truth, the 767 with the GEnx would fly circles around the 787 with the exception of being unable to do the ULR missions.
If you think up to 9000 lbs is significant between the A321 and the 737-900ER, try 40,000 between the bantam 737-300ER and the porky 787-8.
On typical DAL missions the 787 would burn the same as the existing ER, carry fewer people and have significantly higher capital expenses, that's why we're redoing the ER interiors with the 777/765 cabin.
A number of 737-900 to tie us over, plus 20 717s thrown in as a signing bonus and I can see this is a good deal for the company...
Cheers
George
If you think up to 9000 lbs is significant between the A321 and the 737-900ER, try 40,000 between the bantam 737-300ER and the porky 787-8.
On typical DAL missions the 787 would burn the same as the existing ER, carry fewer people and have significantly higher capital expenses, that's why we're redoing the ER interiors with the 777/765 cabin.
A number of 737-900 to tie us over, plus 20 717s thrown in as a signing bonus and I can see this is a good deal for the company...
Cheers
George
08-23-2011, 04:02 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Some good news about the 737-9ER though.. since it is a .78 airplane, we won't have to worry about transcon turns under the new rest rules..
08-23-2011, 04:05 AM
seeing the large hubs...
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: 73N A
Posts: 3,714
I added in Airbuses to the mix. The data is from last night, same caveats as before.
Aircraft Avg Flt Time
A319 2:24
B737-700 2:48
A320 3:00
A321 3:10
B737-800 3:17
B737-900 3:45
B757-200 4:16
B757-300 4:28
B767-300 6:42
Aircraft Avg Flt Time
A319 2:24
B737-700 2:48
A320 3:00
A321 3:10
B737-800 3:17
B737-900 3:45
B757-200 4:16
B757-300 4:28
B767-300 6:42
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
