Why didn't Delta keep their 747-400s in service longer? Weren't they perfectly maintained most Pre-merger with Northwest? I know that United had to retire the 747s quickly because of less maintenance? But Delta could've keep them until the 2020s but why did Delta have to retire them in 2017 instead of 2020?

From memory, they needed to do the Fuel Tank Inerting System, which costs a lot of money for the little life they had left.

At least DL preserved 6301 instead of sending her to the scrapper.

UA857 wrote:

Why didn't Delta keep their 747-400s in service longer? Weren't they perfectly maintained most Pre-merger with Northwest? I know that United had to retire the 747s quickly because of less maintenance? But Delta could've keep them until the 2020s but why did Delta have to retire them in 2017 instead of 2020?

I'm not following the UA comment. Is the inference that, unlike NW, UA did not perfectly maintain their 747s?

Did NW or DL ever extend the service life of their 744s?

They were gas-guzzlers compared to the equipment they have in their current fleet.

Did Delta ever have their own 747's pre-merger?

alan3 wrote:

Did Delta ever have their own 747's pre-merger?

Delta operated 5 747-132s in the early to mid-1970s. Like most US carriers at the time they quickly figured out the airplane was simply too big for their domestic network. Further down is a thread with some video of a Delta 747 at Dallas Love Field.

niagara484

catiii wrote:

UA857 wrote:

Why didn't Delta keep their 747-400s in service longer? Weren't they perfectly maintained most Pre-merger with Northwest? I know that United had to retire the 747s quickly because of less maintenance? But Delta could've keep them until the 2020s but why did Delta have to retire them in 2017 instead of 2020?

I'm not following the UA comment. Is the inference that, unlike NW, UA did not perfectly maintain their 747s?

To operate in 2018 and beyond, the 747-400's needed modifications to the Fuel Tank Inerting System, which I would assume is not cheap for an airline with a fleet of 20+ 744's. Also, rising fuel costs and more expensive maintenance was a factor as well, for United and Delta alike.

catiii wrote:

UA857 wrote:

Why didn't Delta keep their 747-400s in service longer? Weren't they perfectly maintained most Pre-merger with Northwest? I know that United had to retire the 747s quickly because of less maintenance? But Delta could've keep them until the 2020s but why did Delta have to retire them in 2017 instead of 2020?

I'm not following the UA comment. Is the inference that, unlike NW, UA did not perfectly maintain their 747s?

Right. The quality of postings has gone way down. It’s turning into a tabloid style discussion board.

UA poorly maintained their 747s so HAD to retire them, but DL maintained theirs much better so why did they HAVE to retire them?

Delta operated 1 owned and 1 leased 744 newer than newest UA 744 and BA 744. And DL retired them too early (N675-676NW , both delivered in 2002).

Why did xyz airline not keep zyx plane?
Because it did not make financial sense.....

How much longer was NW going to operate the 744s prior to the DL merger?

UA857 wrote:

How much longer was NW going to operate the 744s prior to the DL merger?

Until September 26th, 2028 (just the six late deliveries though).

The OP is a kid.

yabeweb wrote:

Why did xyz airline not keep zyx plane?
Because it did not make financial sense.....

Yep. Pretty much the same answer to almost every thread here. Its a business decision. Thats it.

WayexTDI wrote:

From memory, they needed to do the Fuel Tank Inerting System, which costs a lot of money for the little life they had left.

At least DL preserved 6301 instead of sending her to the scrapper.

Correct. The same thing affected UA to my knowledge, which is why both retired their 747s around the same time and UA had to juggle its fleet plans to make it happen (i.e., order 77Ws it hadn't originally planned on).

compensateme wrote:

UA857 wrote:

How much longer was NW going to operate the 744s prior to the DL merger?

Until September 26th, 2028 (just the six late deliveries though).

Whoa! that´s a long time for the 744 to live up to when was that retirement date released? I believe it was around 2002.

compensateme wrote:

UA857 wrote:

How much longer was NW going to operate the 744s prior to the DL merger?

Until September 26th, 2028 (just the six late deliveries though).

Wow... it would have been the last major 744 operator (BA 2024 , LH 2025). NW usually retired their aircraft older than other airlines.

These were ex-NW 744s. Weren't these some of the oldest 744s in service,? NW was the launch customer.

Busyboy2 wrote:

yabeweb wrote:

Why did xyz airline not keep zyx plane?
Because it did not make financial sense.....

Yep. Pretty much the same answer to almost every thread here. Its a business decision. Thats it.

It might kill lots of discussion, but it is the only real answer, business do not operate in any other way, if it makes money it stays, if it doesn't it goes, if there is anything else that in the long run is better / more profitable it goes!

It's plain simple math.

It goes for planes, airport or any other business related decision.

alan3 wrote:

Did Delta ever have their own 747's pre-merger?

Delta actually did have some B747-132's which they Sold.

niagara484 wrote:

alan3 wrote:

Did Delta ever have their own 747's pre-merger?

Delta operated 5 747-132s in the early to mid-1970s. Like most US carriers at the time they quickly figured out the airplane was simply too big for their domestic network. Further down is a thread with some video of a Delta 747 at Dallas Love Field.

niagara484

DL actually knew from the word go that the 747 was too much airplane for them. They only bought them basically as a stopgap for the L-1011 or DC-10. (Spoiler Alert: They ended up favoring the L-1011 over the DC-10) Here is an article that talks all about it. It's a pretty interesting read.

https://www.airlinereporter.com/2015/10 ... g-747-100/

wedgetail737 wrote:

They were gas-guzzlers compared to the equipment they have in their current fleet.

Same engines as the 767-Oldies they still have. So the 767s are gas guzzlers too?
Just to note, with a high load factor the per-seat-burn of a 744 is lower than that of a 767.

vorellanaj wrote:

Delta operated 1 owned and 1 leased 744 newer than newest UA 744 and BA 744. And DL retired them too early (N675-676NW , both delivered in 2002).

I guess you cant economically keep a very small number of new frames (Delta had 6 built between 1999 and 2002) when most of the subfleet (10 frames from 1988-1990) are the oldest of the type.

yabeweb wrote:

Busyboy2 wrote:

yabeweb wrote:

Why did xyz airline not keep zyx plane?
Because it did not make financial sense.....

Yep. Pretty much the same answer to almost every thread here. Its a business decision. Thats it.

It might kill lots of discussion, but it is the only real answer, business do not operate in any other way, if it makes money it stays, if it doesn't it goes, if there is anything else that in the long run is better / more profitable it goes!

It's plain simple math.

It goes for planes, airport or any other business related decision.

For the most part your comment is true but there are some routes that are money losers that will be operated just so said airline can be in a given market.

klm617 wrote:

yabeweb wrote:

Busyboy2 wrote:

Yep. Pretty much the same answer to almost every thread here. Its a business decision. Thats it.

It might kill lots of discussion, but it is the only real answer, business do not operate in any other way, if it makes money it stays, if it doesn't it goes, if there is anything else that in the long run is better / more profitable it goes!

It's plain simple math.

It goes for planes, airport or any other business related decision.

For the most part your comment is true but there are some routes that are money losers that will be operated just so said airline can be in a given market.

Wich means, making money in the ling run.

Again, a decision is made such that makes money, Sony sells consoles losing money, or that is one way to see it, they make money with software, so Sony gaming does not lose money.

Poeple need to see both part of the equation (investment and return) , that market is important to me and I can make money? Yes, then i can "invest " (some say lose money) and get the return later on.

No company (airline in this case) serve a route if it does not benefit some other way, be it partnership or putting a foot in the door in such market, the minute they see that such foot in the door is useless or achieved the purpose you can bet such route will be closed down.

What people say lose money, business call it "investing money" some of them fail to see when it is time to pull out of an investment (not all business man are lucky / competent enought to find out the right timing) but if you decided to lose money in the short term, it is because you plan on manking plenty more in the long run.

UA857 wrote:

compensateme wrote:

UA857 wrote:

How much longer was NW going to operate the 744s prior to the DL merger?

Until September 26th, 2028 (just the six late deliveries though).

Whoa! that´s a long time for the 744 to live up to when was that retirement date released? I believe it was around 2002.

Sarcasm: the use of irony to mock or convey contempt.

Ah, the classic "Why didn't ________ keep their ________'s longer?"

Because... there are better options? Like did you even think about this?! At all?!

Quoting acjbbj (Reply # 28), " . . .did you even think about this?! At all?!"

acjbbj, of course there was absolutely no thought process put into this. Unfortunately, I think this is the direction Airliners.net has been going for quite a few years now. Many people on this site are unable to either think critically or do any form of research on their own.

The OP might as well have asked, "Why didn't BOAC keep their Comets longer? Why didn't Air France keep their Caravelles longer? Why didn't Northwest keep their Stratocruisers longer? Why didn't Braniff keep their Convair 340s longer?" It is an endless cycle of "what if."

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply # 14), "The OP is a kid."

How do you know?

e38