How many A330NEO will DL convert to A359

xdlx · Fri Jul 14, 2017 4:47 pm

Now that the ink on the transfer of the first A359 to DL how soon do airliners.n anticipates to them switching the 330NEO orders to A359?

ikolkyo · Fri Jul 14, 2017 4:59 pm

What makes you think they will do that? They already delayed later A350 deliveries and they have options for more I believe.

MSPbrandon · Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:03 pm

Not soon at all. they need the 330s

Polot · Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:05 pm

If anything I would be more concerned over whether DL converts their later A350 deliveries (which have been deferred) to the A339 rather than the other way around.

winginit · Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:15 pm

None? Why would they do that?

MIAFLLPBIFlyer · Fri Jul 14, 2017 7:47 pm

xdlx wrote:
Now that the ink on the transfer of the first A359 to DL how soon do airliners.n anticipates to them switching the 330NEO orders to A359?

I'm actually under the impression the opposite might happen. But I could be dead wrong.

Tedd · Fri Jul 14, 2017 9:24 pm

I`m with most, why would they indeed? The Neo will be great for DL, just as the Ceo has been & is.

gatibosgru · Fri Jul 14, 2017 9:31 pm

I don't think DL is considering switching the A330NEO to the A359s when they have so many CEOs currently in operation. The NEO makes so much sense for DL, I believe it'll find a long lasting home with them.

ElroyJetson · Fri Jul 14, 2017 9:34 pm

I agree with a prior poster. I think DL is much more likely to convert A350 orders to A330 Neo's. When you look at fuel burn and CASM on a A330 Neo on missions under 4000nm, it is just about as good as anything out there. The 787-9 might be a fraction better on those types of TATL missions...but still very close.

Meanwhile the A350 has a lot of competition from multiple frames that can likely either beat it on price (77W) or efficiency (787-9 or 777x.).

350helmi · Fri Jul 14, 2017 9:58 pm

ElroyJetson wrote:

Meanwhile the A350 has a lot of competition from multiple frames that can likely either beat it on price (77W) or efficiency (787-9 or 777x.).

I am under the impression that the A350 is very slightly more efficient that the 789, not that it makes much difference here. I would expect DL to order more of possibly both planes, but at least the A339. Both planes have a dedicated role in DL fleet and will be great for them.

350helmi

ghifty · Fri Jul 14, 2017 10:03 pm

They actually deferred some A350. Original plan proved to be a little too much capacity for present demand. So for now it seems unlikely to see more A350.

http://news.delta.com/delta-expand-airb ... deliveries

Not a huge deferral, so the future could see more A350s.

"In 2014, Delta Air Lines ordered 25 Airbus A350-900 aircraft and 25 Airbus A330-900neo. Boeing, which was also in the race for the wide body jet deal, was left in the cold since Delta considered Boeing’s proposed Boeing 777X a paper airplane and the delivery schedule of the Boeing 787 was not attractive enough.

The infographic gives a brief overview of the market value of the aircraft and the delivery timeline. With a catalog value of $15B, the market value of $6.85B indicates a >50% discount, which is to be expected for an order of this size.

The initial delivery schedule indicated 6 deliveries in 2017, 9 in 2018, 6 in 2019 and 4 in 2020. Last year Delta Air Lines deferred 4 aircraft from 2018 to 2019/2020:"

https://seekingalpha.com/article/407313 ... ers-orders

Polarisguy · Fri Jul 14, 2017 10:07 pm

really disappointed in DL decision to go all out on Airbus. Must be a hangover of the former NW now DL management paired with HUGE AB discounts assisted by the EU insisting on AirBus purchases in order to approve the NW/DL merger. Really would prefer 78/8/9's to McPlanes

Siren · Fri Jul 14, 2017 10:07 pm

I'm thinking the deferred A359s will be converted to NEOs. Think about it - the A330NEO order book isn't quite as strong as Airbus would like. This is a golden opportunity for them to bulk up A330NEO production, take some strain off the A359/A35J production line, which is still having issues ramping up. I imagine very favorable terms would be offered to DL for such a change.

448205 · Fri Jul 14, 2017 10:10 pm

350helmi wrote:
ElroyJetson wrote:

Meanwhile the A350 has a lot of competition from multiple frames that can likely either beat it on price (77W) or efficiency (787-9 or 777x.).

I am under the impression that the A350 is very slightly more efficient that the 789, not that it makes much difference here. I would expect DL to order more of possibly both planes, but at least the A339. Both planes have a dedicated role in DL fleet and will be great for them.

350helmi

The 787-9 is more efficient than the A350-900 at 300 seats.

The reverse can be said about the A350-1000 and the 77W

mjoelnir · Fri Jul 14, 2017 10:50 pm

I think Delta will neither switch A330 to A350 nor A350 to A330. Both were bought for different routes and they are of different size.

bunumuring · Fri Jul 14, 2017 10:53 pm

Hey guys,
In the specific case of Sydney, Delta needs the A350 rather than the A330neo... The 777-200LRs currently flying the route are fine of course but A350 has been anointed as their successors LAX-SYD. I am very much looking forward to welcoming the Airbus to Sydney and hope that it lifts Delta's operating performance here. Delta is very much a 'low publicity' airline in the Australian market, in my opinion.
Cheers,
Bunumuring

Polot · Fri Jul 14, 2017 11:02 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
I think Delta will neither switch A330 to A350 nor A350 to A330. Both were bought for different routes and they are of different size.

It will depend on how pacific/India/Mideast yields are looking in a couple of years. The A330neo is much better fit for the rest of DL's network (and slots in nicely with their large A330ceo fleet), especially if Airbus raises the MTOW like rumored and like many here hope. The difference in size between the A359 and A339 is not really big enough to sway DL's opinion on which one to get.

winginit · Fri Jul 14, 2017 11:08 pm

Polarisguy wrote:
really disappointed in DL decision to go all out on Airbus. Must be a hangover of the former NW now DL management paired with HUGE AB discounts assisted by the EU insisting on AirBus purchases in order to approve the NW/DL merger. Really would prefer 78/8/9's to McPlanes

Or, as is far more likely, DL was simply able to get much better pricing and a far superior delivery schedule with Airbus versus Boeing, which more closely adheres to the crux of their fleet strategy that prioritizes the cost-effective, reliable, and timely delivery of new aircraft.

Newbiepilot · Fri Jul 14, 2017 11:09 pm

The only reason I see A330neos converted to A350s is if the Trent 7000 is a disaster. The Trent 1000 is having trouble on the 787 and the related Trent 7000 is delaying flight testing and entry into service for the A330neo but most expect its issues to be addressed.

mjoelnir · Fri Jul 14, 2017 11:18 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
The only reason I see A330neos converted to A350s is if the Trent 7000 is a disaster. The Trent 1000 is having trouble on the 787 and the related Trent 7000 is delaying flight testing and entry into service for the A330neo but most expect its issues to be addressed.

The Trrent 7000 is based on the Trent 1000 ten, a development of the Trent 1000, with some Trent XWB technology.

Newbiepilot · Fri Jul 14, 2017 11:38 pm

The Trent 1000 is causing problems due to spare part, blade and overhaul issues and the related Trent 1000 ten and Trent 7000 are delayed

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... 7s-439068/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/201 ... 0-engines/

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... icing-snag

I don't expect this to impact Delta taking A330neos. Delta is not first in line for A330neos so other airlines can deal with initial entry into service problems. Converting to A350s would lose some of the launch discount pricing that they got.

aemoreira1981 · Fri Jul 14, 2017 11:43 pm

Converting A350s to A339s makes more sense, especially if the A359 is exclusively DTW and MSP. The ex-Gulf Air 767s as well as ships 170-199 are running out of hours.

rbavfan · Sat Jul 15, 2017 12:03 am

Polarisguy wrote:
really disappointed in DL decision to go all out on Airbus. Must be a hangover of the former NW now DL management paired with HUGE AB discounts assisted by the EU insisting on AirBus purchases in order to approve the NW/DL merger. Really would prefer 78/8/9's to McPlanes

No. Just a better fit for them. I would not be surprised if a higher gross weight A359 will eventually replace the similar capacity 772/77L. It could easily do ATL-JNB with less fuel burn. Why keep a small fleet of 772 series when the A359 will cover the same, reduce on site parts, allows better crew use system wide due to minor differential A330/A350 pilot training. If they need a larger frame the A350-1000 is there. Common training for all WB operations reduces cost.

MIflyer12 · Sat Jul 15, 2017 12:05 am

bunumuring wrote:
Hey guys,
In the specific case of Sydney, Delta needs the A350 rather than the A330neo... The 777-200LRs currently flying the route are fine of course but A350 has been anointed as their successors LAX-SYD. I am very much looking forward to welcoming the Airbus to Sydney and hope that it lifts Delta's operating performance here. Delta is very much a 'low publicity' airline in the Australian market, in my opinion.
Cheers,
Bunumuring

but A350 has been anointed as their successors LAX-SYD.

No, I don't believe they have, actually. There's been lots of discussion about LAX-SYD staying 77L. 77Ls (and 777s) have been announced to get the Delta One Suites.

http://news.delta.com/delta-one-suite-s ... -award-win

Polot · Sat Jul 15, 2017 12:51 am

rbavfan wrote:
Polarisguy wrote:
really disappointed in DL decision to go all out on Airbus. Must be a hangover of the former NW now DL management paired with HUGE AB discounts assisted by the EU insisting on AirBus purchases in order to approve the NW/DL merger. Really would prefer 78/8/9's to McPlanes

No. Just a better fit for them. I would not be surprised if a higher gross weight A359 will eventually replace the similar capacity 772/77L. It could easily do ATL-JNB with less fuel burn. Why keep a small fleet of 772 series when the A359 will cover the same, reduce on site parts, allows better crew use system wide due to minor differential A330/A350 pilot training. If they need a larger frame the A350-1000 is there. Common training for all WB operations reduces cost.

Unless DL moves to the A330/A350 having a single crew (right now I think they are separate at DL) the training benefits between the two are minimal. Who gets placed on the A350 will be dependent on seniority not prior equipment and the training will likely be more rigorous than the theoretical minimum between the types.

rbavfan · Sat Jul 15, 2017 1:10 am

Polot wrote:
rbavfan wrote:
Polarisguy wrote:
really disappointed in DL decision to go all out on Airbus. Must be a hangover of the former NW now DL management paired with HUGE AB discounts assisted by the EU insisting on AirBus purchases in order to approve the NW/DL merger. Really would prefer 78/8/9's to McPlanes

No. Just a better fit for them. I would not be surprised if a higher gross weight A359 will eventually replace the similar capacity 772/77L. It could easily do ATL-JNB with less fuel burn. Why keep a small fleet of 772 series when the A359 will cover the same, reduce on site parts, allows better crew use system wide due to minor differential A330/A350 pilot training. If they need a larger frame the A350-1000 is there. Common training for all WB operations reduces cost.

Unless DL moves to the A330/A350 having a single crew (right now I think they are separate at DL) the training benefits between the two are minimal. Who gets placed on the A350 will be dependent on seniority not prior equipment and the training will likely be more rigorous than the theoretical minimum between the types.

Sort of like the stock market I am looking long term, not short term that most look at. Long run the A330-A350 series makes more sense. Lots of crew can move up easier from the A319-A321 series. (yes I now seniority rules from the unions) it will still reduce some long term cost in crews & if the 777 goes away it's one less set of spares to keep around. If they do replace 767's with A330ceo/neo's long term. it will reduce spares count even farther.

And Delta & old NW management has always thought long term. Otherwise why are MD-80/90 still so in the fleet. Why did the DC-9's stay so long.

Polot · Sat Jul 15, 2017 1:29 am

rbavfan wrote:
Polot wrote:
rbavfan wrote:

No. Just a better fit for them. I would not be surprised if a higher gross weight A359 will eventually replace the similar capacity 772/77L. It could easily do ATL-JNB with less fuel burn. Why keep a small fleet of 772 series when the A359 will cover the same, reduce on site parts, allows better crew use system wide due to minor differential A330/A350 pilot training. If they need a larger frame the A350-1000 is there. Common training for all WB operations reduces cost.

Unless DL moves to the A330/A350 having a single crew (right now I think they are separate at DL) the training benefits between the two are minimal. Who gets placed on the A350 will be dependent on seniority not prior equipment and the training will likely be more rigorous than the theoretical minimum between the types.

Sort of like the stock market I am looking long term, not short term that most look at. Long run the A330-A350 series makes more sense. Lots of crew can move up easier from the A319-A321 series. (yes I now seniority rules from the unions) it will still reduce some long term cost in crews & if the 777 goes away it's one less set of spares to keep around. If they do replace 767's with A330ceo/neo's long term. it will reduce spares count even farther.

And Delta & old NW management has always thought long term. Otherwise why are MD-80/90 still so in the fleet. Why did the DC-9's stay so long.

Long term the 777s will still be around. All the 77Ls are only 7-8 years old. They are not going anywhere anytime soon.

MIflyer12 · Sat Jul 15, 2017 2:11 am

rbavfan wrote:
Sort of like the stock market I am looking long term, not short term that most look at. Long run the A330-A350 series makes more sense. Lots of crew can move up easier from the A319-A321 series. (yes I now seniority rules from the unions) it will still reduce some long term cost in crews & if the 777 goes away it's one less set of spares to keep around. If they do replace 767's with A330ceo/neo's long term. it will reduce spares count even farther.

And Delta & old NW management has always thought long term. Otherwise why are MD-80/90 still so in the fleet. Why did the DC-9's stay so long.

If Delta gave a flip about training costs it wouldn't have the highly fragmented fleet it does. The training benefit of Airbus narrowbody into Airbus widebody must round down to nothing.

xdlx · Sat Jul 15, 2017 2:38 am

The only reason of the initial question, they just refered to the 359 as the "flagship"... and as others mentioned the remaining NW love affair with Airbus. Based on the responses, the community feels the A33HW is the best fit for DL....oh well!

ElroyJetson · Sat Jul 15, 2017 3:12 am

350helmi wrote:
ElroyJetson wrote:

Meanwhile the A350 has a lot of competition from multiple frames that can likely either beat it on price (77W) or efficiency (787-9 or 777x.).

I am under the impression that the A350 is very slightly more efficient that the 789, not that it makes much difference here. I would expect DL to order more of possibly both planes, but at least the A339. Both planes have a dedicated role in DL fleet and will be great for them.

350helmi

I guess it depends on the analysis you look at. Certainly the A330 Neo is very efficient at missions of 4000 nm or less. This would cover the vast majority of TATL flights DL says they will use the aircraft for. Both the 787-9 and the A330 Neo are within 2-3% on these missions. Beyond the 4000 nm point every analysis I've seen says the 787-9 has the edge.

My guess is DL got the A330 Neo sooner than they could have gotten the 787-9, and I would assume a better price? For use on TATL flights I think the A330 Neo would be a very good choice.

flyabr · Sat Jul 15, 2017 3:21 am

My guess is DL got the A330 Neo sooner than they could have gotten the 787-9, and I would assume a better price? For use on TATL flights I think the A330 Neo would be a very good choice.

In the last widebody contest, DL wasn't pitting the 789 against the A330NEO, it was in competition with the A359 for TPAC ops. If things had worked out, DL may well have ordered 25 789s and 25 A330NEOs. For whatever reason(s) the entire purchase went to Airbus.

scotron11 · Sat Jul 15, 2017 3:46 am

flyabr wrote:
My guess is DL got the A330 Neo sooner than they could have gotten the 787-9, and I would assume a better price? For use on TATL flights I think the A330 Neo would be a very good choice.

In the last widebody contest, DL wasn't pitting the 789 against the A330NEO, it was in competition with the A359 for TPAC ops. If things had worked out, DL may well have ordered 25 789s and 25 A330NEOs. For whatever reason(s) the entire purchase went to Airbus.

Maybe was a case of buy 1 A330NEO get 1 A359 for free, is that what you mean? :rotfl:

kimimm19 · Sat Jul 15, 2017 5:08 am

I think you'll end up seeing more of both aircraft (A350 and A339neo) in general. Delta has shown that they do not wish to have the 787 and the A330neo will be needed to take care of the sizeable 767 fleet that they have which is due for retirement soonish. So unless there's a change of heart then you'll see both needed to take care of the 777 and 767 replacement and A330 upguage/renewal...

scotron11 · Sat Jul 15, 2017 6:03 am

xdlx wrote:
Now that the ink on the transfer of the first A359 to DL how soon do airliners.n anticipates to them switching the 330NEO orders to A359?

May not be any switch, but I feel more A350s will find their way to DL. Going by SQ and CX, they cannot get enough!

raylee67 · Sat Jul 15, 2017 6:26 am

Don't see DL needing a lot more A350. My understanding is that the A339NEO is more efficient in flying the routes that can be flown by both 339NEO and 350. If you look at DL's route network, all routes except for DTW-Asia, ATL-Asia, MSP-Asia and SEA-Europe can be covered by the capabilities of 339NEO. That does not leave a lot of routes that is better to be operated with A350 vs A339.

AAIRLINERS · Sat Jul 15, 2017 6:55 am

From all Ive seen and heard I agree that Delta's move and probably the wisest move would be to acquire the NEOs sooner and the 359s later.
The NEOs would be common for most their requirements for less money especially if they got a good deal on them. Their older 330s and 767s need
replacement whereas their newish 777s can temporarily fill the void on longer niche flying the 359 would be used for. Honestly I am surprised they didn't defer the initial 359 delivery. Probably too late in the process to change orders. As with all the US carriers wide body deferrals seem to be the
consensus right now. Replacement is good. Capacity expansion not so much.

bunumuring · Sat Jul 15, 2017 7:04 am

MIflyer12 wrote:
bunumuring wrote:
Hey guys,
In the specific case of Sydney, Delta needs the A350 rather than the A330neo... The 777-200LRs currently flying the route are fine of course but A350 has been anointed as their successors LAX-SYD. I am very much looking forward to welcoming the Airbus to Sydney and hope that it lifts Delta's operating performance here. Delta is very much a 'low publicity' airline in the Australian market, in my opinion.
Cheers,
Bunumuring

but A350 has been anointed as their successors LAX-SYD.

No, I don't believe they have, actually. There's been lots of discussion about LAX-SYD staying 77L. 77Ls (and 777s) have been announced to get the Delta One Suites.

http://news.delta.com/delta-one-suite-s ... -award-win

Hey mate,
Sorry but it was reported as such in the Australian media a while ago. Admittedly it was before the leaked Delta memo (or whatever it was) mentioning that the A350 wasn't suitable for the LAX-SYD route but I haven't heard anything since about a change of plans to keep the 777 into Sydney long-term.
Cheers
Bunumuring

350helmi · Sat Jul 15, 2017 7:36 am

Varsity1 wrote:

The 787-9 is more efficient than the A350-900 at 300 seats.

May very well be that the 789 is more efficient whe they have the same seating capacity. But that gives an inherent advantage to the 789 in that it is most definately the smaller frame. In comparable seating densities I maintain (from what I have read on here) that the A350 is the more efficient plane. Even in the manufacturer specified seating arrangements there is a 35 seat difference (325 vs 290), and I know that won't be a definitive difference since they don't use the same seats and have a different mix of J, Y+, Y, but it does show that the A350 is definately the larger plane. Also the A350 is very slighltly newer so will have a slight engine SFC advantage.

350helmi

ikolkyo · Sat Jul 15, 2017 7:42 am

350helmi wrote:
Varsity1 wrote:

The 787-9 is more efficient than the A350-900 at 300 seats.

May very well be that the 789 is more efficient whe they have the same seating capacity. But that gives an inherent advantage to the 789 in that it is most definately the smaller frame. In comparable seating densities I maintain (from what I have read on here) that the A350 is the more efficient plane. Even in the manufacturer specified seating arrangements there is a 35 seat difference (325 vs 290), and I know that won't be a definitive difference since they don't use the same seats and have a different mix of J, Y+, Y, but it does show that the A350 is definately the larger plane. Also the A350 is very slighltly newer so will have a slight engine SFC advantage.

350helmi

I'm pretty sure the Trent 1000 TEN will negate any SFC advantage with all the improvements it has.

Scorpio · Sat Jul 15, 2017 7:56 am

Polarisguy wrote:
really disappointed in DL decision to go all out on Airbus. Must be a hangover of the former NW now DL management paired with HUGE AB discounts assisted by the EU insisting on AirBus purchases in order to approve the NW/DL merger. Really would prefer 78/8/9's to McPlanes

Lots of hearsay and misinformation in this post. First, there is NO indication Airbus offered discounts that were deeper than what Boeing was willing to offer, or that they routinely do so as some people, especially in the US appear to believe. Second, where are you getting the idea the EU insisted on Delta ordering Airbus planes in order for them to approve the DL/NW merger? I've never heard anything about that. Furthermore, this order was placed several years AFTER the merger had already happened. The EU approved the merger in 2008, these planes were ordered in late 2014.

And McPlanes? Really?

scbriml · Sat Jul 15, 2017 10:46 am

Polarisguy wrote:
really disappointed in DL decision to go all out on Airbus. Must be a hangover of the former NW now DL management paired with HUGE AB discounts assisted by the EU insisting on AirBus purchases in order to approve the NW/DL merger. Really would prefer 78/8/9's to McPlanes

Seriously? :rotfl:

scotron11 wrote:
Maybe was a case of buy 1 A330NEO get 1 A359 for free, is that what you mean?

Don't even joke about it, some will believe it.

kimimm19 wrote:
I think you'll end up seeing more of both aircraft (A350 and A339neo) in general.

Agreed. Long-term, they need a lot more than what they currently have on order.

Scorpio wrote:
Polarisguy wrote:
really disappointed in DL decision to go all out on Airbus. Must be a hangover of the former NW now DL management paired with HUGE AB discounts assisted by the EU insisting on AirBus purchases in order to approve the NW/DL merger. Really would prefer 78/8/9's to McPlanes

Lots of hearsay and misinformation in this post. First, there is NO indication Airbus offered discounts that were deeper than what Boeing was willing to offer, or that they routinely do so as some people, especially in the US appear to believe. Second, where are you getting the idea the EU insisted on Delta ordering Airbus planes in order for them to approve the DL/NW merger? I've never heard anything about that. Furthermore, this order was placed several years AFTER the merger had already happened. The EU approved the merger in 2008, these planes were ordered in late 2014.

And McPlanes? Really?

You can't let facts get in the way of a good rant. :wink2:

Newbiepilot · Sat Jul 15, 2017 10:54 am

AAIRLINERS wrote:
From all Ive seen and heard I agree that Delta's move and probably the wisest move would be to acquire the NEOs sooner and the 359s later.
The NEOs would be common for most their requirements for less money especially if they got a good deal on them. Their older 330s and 767s need
replacement whereas their newish 777s can temporarily fill the void on longer niche flying the 359 would be used for. Honestly I am surprised they didn't defer the initial 359 delivery. Probably too late in the process to change orders. As with all the US carriers wide body deferrals seem to be the
consensus right now. Replacement is good. Capacity expansion not so much.

I disagree that Delta should acquire NEOs sooner and A350s later. The A350 has the ability to open up longer range flights. With the 747s leaving the fleet, Delta is very limited in the number of planes that it has that can fly over 6000 nautical miles. The A330-200 is close to the edge of its range flying SEA-HKG and DTW-PEK. There are only a limited number of 777s in the network. If DL wanted to respond to UA and SQ flying SFO-SIN nonstop by starting their own nonstop SEA-SIN, It might be a challenge for them to free up a 777. Having A350s will allow Delta the flexibility to compete and adjust their network. We might see them open up some more routes.

Strato2 · Sat Jul 15, 2017 1:02 pm

Varsity1 wrote:
The 787-9 is more efficient than the A350-900 at 300 seats.

Prove it. The A350-900 is a newer design with newer engines.

StTim · Sat Jul 15, 2017 1:19 pm

Strato2 wrote:
Varsity1 wrote:
The 787-9 is more efficient than the A350-900 at 300 seats.

Prove it. The A350-900 is a newer design with newer engines.

If it is quoted on here enough it will become accepted fact by many - even with no proof.

JerseyFlyer · Sat Jul 15, 2017 1:43 pm

Scorpio wrote:
Second, where are you getting the idea the EU insisted on Delta ordering Airbus planes in order for them to approve the DL/NW merger? I've never heard anything about that. Furthermore, this order was placed several years AFTER the merger had already happened.

Maybe the EU made Delta cancel the NW launch orders for 787s!!! (Which Delta could readily have taken by now as 787-9s if it had wanted them)

hloutweg · Sat Jul 15, 2017 2:27 pm

Where will the A350s be based for those flights to the Asian cities. Will the flights be from LAX-Asia or other cities in the United States as well (e.g. Atlanta)

Whatsaptudo · Sat Jul 15, 2017 3:20 pm

Strato2 wrote:
Varsity1 wrote:
The 787-9 is more efficient than the A350-900 at 300 seats.

Prove it. The A350-900 is a newer design with newer engines.

Seems fairly harsh. Can you prove the opposite?

AngMoh · Sat Jul 15, 2017 3:36 pm

Whatsaptudo wrote:
Strato2 wrote:
Varsity1 wrote:
The 787-9 is more efficient than the A350-900 at 300 seats.

Prove it. The A350-900 is a newer design with newer engines.

Seems fairly harsh. Can you prove the opposite?

The fact that quite a number of airlines have both 787 and A350 in their fleets shows that it depends on how you use them. And none of us have the details, and even if someone has the details, he/she will be fired if it is communicated here.
So black and white statements that A is better than B or B is better than A is just fanboy talk.

VictorKilo · Sat Jul 15, 2017 3:59 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:

I disagree that Delta should acquire NEOs sooner and A350s later. The A350 has the ability to open up longer range flights. With the 747s leaving the fleet, Delta is very limited in the number of planes that it has that can fly over 6000 nautical miles. The A330-200 is close to the edge of its range flying SEA-HKG and DTW-PEK. There are only a limited number of 777s in the network. If DL wanted to respond to UA and SQ flying SFO-SIN nonstop by starting their own nonstop SEA-SIN, It might be a challenge for them to free up a 777. Having A350s will allow Delta the flexibility to compete and adjust their network. We might see them open up some more routes.

DTW-PEK will be one of the first 359 flights, along with DTW-NRT/ICN. DL is putting the 77L on all of its 7000+ mile routes including DTW-PVG which is a 744 route today.

If there will be new routes flown with the 359 I expect them to be flights to DLs new JV hub in ICN and not flights that overfly the KL hub, but I think there will be no need to convert airframes in either direction to make it work.

Chaostheory · Sat Jul 15, 2017 4:15 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
The Trent 1000 is causing problems due to spare part, blade and overhaul issues and the related Trent 1000 ten and Trent 7000 are delayed

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... 7s-439068/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/201 ... 0-engines/

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... icing-snag

I don't expect this to impact Delta taking A330neos. Delta is not first in line for A330neos so other airlines can deal with initial entry into service problems. Converting to A350s would lose some of the launch discount pricing that they got.

I think you're clutching at straws.

1 - There isn't a spare parts issue. The largest RR spares warehouse is located in Singapore which has a plethora of flights to BKK a day. That Thai is having issues with its spares pool is more indicative of a logistics or communication issue than one caused by the RR supply chain. Larger RR 787 fleets don't have any issues with spares so I'm not sure why Thai does.

2 - There are no T1000 blade and overhaul "issues". In fact looking at the LLP cycle limits, the two engine types compare favourably.

3 - The T1000 is proving to be a far more robust engine than the GEnx. I recall from a recent feedback session that the GEnx has a higher EGT degradation rate than the RR. In the first 1000 cycles, the GEnx1 at 76k rating loses 3C more than the Trent and with hotter climes and higher ratings, that difference is even more marked in favour of the latter.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net