Delta (finally) adds -8 to the CF34 line

[robbedagain]

wow may be theyll put extra fuel tanks on their planes for the runs hehehe

 

[WorldTraveler]

ATL-ORD is an all RJ operation for both AA and UA but all mainline for DL; not surprisingly, DL has almost 2/3 of the seats in the market.

Just for comparison, UA's ORD hub - their headquarters - has about 625 peak day flights/day during May but 425 flights per day are on regional aircraft of one size or another. Even with the smaller aircraft size, UA's regional partners provide 1/3 of their total number of seats out of ORD.

In contrast, DL's hub in ATL is less than 15% RJ in terms of seats, one of the lowest percentages of regional jet seats of any network carrier hub in the US.

Motley Fool just happens to have a piece about DL vs UA's fleet plans.
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/05/23/united-embraces-bigger-regional-jets-but-still-lag.aspx

 

[Kev3188]

How about this, you save you 50-100 bucks, and I'll take the extra 3 weeks of vacation, 200 bucks and lower healthcare cost.
But you're winning......clearly.

I've had this discussion with countless "No way'ers" over the last few years. They've simply been conditioned to believe that paying dues is a sin, no matter what. I used to show people how my paying $46/mo. saved over $100/mo. on medical premiums alone compared to non-contract at NW. It didn't matter. 'Course, these were the same wack jobs that said I was a "communist" for using the term "worker" to describe all of us.

Very true, DL has m/l service to many markets that most other carriers have RJs. The DL RJ experience is miles above even the better UAX operators like GoJet Skywest or Shuttle America in my experience.

All 3 of those fly for DL too...

Also, this has to be the first time I've ever seen G7 described in a positive manner...

It will be interesting to see how the 717s will be deployed. Maybe they will make an appearance on the Shuttle. In only a flew years time Shuttle has gone from 738s to MD88s to 319s and now 175s.

Look for them on ex- ATL/LGA/MSP routes first. Doubt will see 'em on the Shuttle, though...

ATL-ORD is an all RJ operation for both AA and UA but all mainline for DL; not surprisingly, DL has almost 2/3 of the seats in the market.

Just for comparison, UA's ORD hub - their headquarters - has about 625 peak day flights/day during May but 425 flights per day are on regional aircraft of one size or another. Even with the smaller aircraft size, UA's regional partners provide 1/3 of their total number of seats out of ORD.

In contrast, DL's hub in ATL is less than 15% RJ in terms of seats, one of the lowest percentages of regional jet seats of any network carrier hub in the US.

Motley Fool just happens to have a piece about DL vs UA's fleet plans.
http://www.fool.com/...-still-lag.aspx

I get that ATL is a huge city, but let's also remember that it's a spoke (albeit a larger one) for other carriers.

As for DL hubs, others see a significantly higher portion of RJ flying...

 

[737823]

All 3 of those fly for DL too...

Also, this has to be the first time I've ever seen G7 described in a positive manner...

Look for them on ex- ATL/LGA/MSP routes first. Doubt will see 'em on the Shuttle, though...

The DL RJ experience has more FC seats, real glassware, real meal service and wifi. UA has smaller F cabin, about the same EconomyPlus seats but the overall experience isn't as good. I'd take m/l any day but its clear DL has worked to offer a consistent pax experience (as much as they can) on the RJs.

I know your feelings about GoJet but compared to the other RJ operators they aren't bad. Colgan, Express Jet, Mesa, and Trans States are much worse.

Josh

 

[WorldTraveler]

It's a shame that there are people who would demonize union membership or those who advocate it; it should be - and would be for me if given the choice - a simple economic decision no different from determining whether to obtain financial services from the bank or the credit union (since I belong to both types of financial institutions.)

Actually, there is no difference between what ORD is to DL and what ATL is to AA or UA; both are spokes to another carrier's hub.

You are correct that other DL hubs have higher percentages of RJ seats than ATL; in fact, DL's hubs at both DTW and MSP have similar percentages of RJ seats as UA and AA have at ORD and IAH etc.
MIA - in which half of the seats are international - has a significantly lower percentage of seats on RJs than most other US carrier hubs but MIA is actually a smaller hub than DL at DTW in terms of total seats; DFW is a lot closer to ATL than most hubs in terms of RJ percentages. But remember that AA's RJ percentages have been limited by scope provisions which have been relaxed under the new contracts so it is very likely that AA's RJ operation will grow significantly.

It is precisely because DL's ATL hub - which is predominantly domestic like most US carrier hubs - has a much lower percentage of regional carrier seats than its peer hubs that a passenger is much more likely to fly on a DL mainline jet throughout DL's system if for no other reason that that the high percentage of mainline seats at ATL significantly helps DL's system average.

And the key point of the article I linked is that the 717 really was a very low cost alternative for DL to push even more seats onto mainline in a type of deal that neither AA or UA can duplicate; if they choose to add 100 seat mainline aircraft, they will spend much more money to do so - and probably won't bother because the cost/benefit for new 100 seat aircraft is not as high as it is for larger mainline aircraft. DL then will be able to further lower its costs relative to them and help improve DL's financial performance relative to AA and UA, even after AA's merger and BK.

DL already competes fairly favorably against AA and UA; DL is the largest(er) carrier in far more of the markets which are to/from an AA, DL, or UA hub on which DL competes with one of the others than is AA or UA.

IN many cases, the reason can be easily traced to the fact that DL uses mainline aircraft or large RJs on at least some flights while AA and UA use smaller RJs.
DL's thesis that adding more mainline aircraft should result in an increased ability to shift revenue from AA and UA certainly seems to be supported by current market data.

Thus, the 717s have the potential to significantly increase DL's revenues at the expense of other carriers which will mean that a lot of cities that DL will shift revenue in markets that are in traditionally strong AA/UA regions.
And of course DL employees will benefit by DL's increased use of mainline aircraft.

BTW, pilot rumors are saying that the long-awaited decision regarding a top-up order involving Airbus or Boeing narrowbodies and widebodies is nearing announcement with Airbus being chosen to supply 30 current generation A321s and 10 new generation A330s which would be primarily used to upgauge flights over the Pacific and free up 777s which fly currently routes currently to Asia that are in range of the new 330s.
The deal was also intended to be part of DL's plan for A or B to take over some of the 50 seat RJs which are being removed from DL's fleet.

 

[Airlinelifer]

Holy sh*t there's a lot to unpack here... (puffs cheeks)

Post merger, DL (re)opened 7 stations to it's employees. IIRC, they are: ORD, SFO, RSW, PHX, PDX, SEA and 1 that escape me (LAS???) . At any rate, they were all staffed with NW employees. IOW, there has been no new locations staffed post merger.

See above. Hope it makes sense...

The one station that escaped you is..........PHL! The ramp was contracted out at DL, NW had mainline ramp. Both airlines had above wing employees.

 

[WorldTraveler]

there is a good interview here with DL's CEO.
Not everyone will like it and some won't want to listen to the full interview but there are comments around minute 16 regarding labor that are worth hearing, even if some here won't agree.

http://www.bloomberg.com/video/delta-ceo-richard-andersen-on-airline-industry-d7tuKAaUQ~SWZtRRqIk~Fw.html?cmpid=yhoo

 

[topDawg]

It's a shame that there are people who would demonize union membership or those who advocate it; it should be - and would be for me if given the choice - a simple economic decision no different from determining whether to obtain financial services from the bank or the credit union (since I belong to both types of financial institutions.)

Actually, there is no difference between what ORD is to DL and what ATL is to AA or UA; both are spokes to another carrier's hub.

You are correct that other DL hubs have higher percentages of RJ seats than ATL; in fact, DL's hubs at both DTW and MSP have similar percentages of RJ seats as UA and AA have at ORD and IAH etc.
MIA - in which half of the seats are international - has a significantly lower percentage of seats on RJs than most other US carrier hubs but MIA is actually a smaller hub than DL at DTW in terms of total seats; DFW is a lot closer to ATL than most hubs in terms of RJ percentages. But remember that AA's RJ percentages have been limited by scope provisions which have been relaxed under the new contracts so it is very likely that AA's RJ operation will grow significantly.

It is precisely because DL's ATL hub - which is predominantly domestic like most US carrier hubs - has a much lower percentage of regional carrier seats than its peer hubs that a passenger is much more likely to fly on a DL mainline jet throughout DL's system if for no other reason that that the high percentage of mainline seats at ATL significantly helps DL's system average.

And the key point of the article I linked is that the 717 really was a very low cost alternative for DL to push even more seats onto mainline in a type of deal that neither AA or UA can duplicate; if they choose to add 100 seat mainline aircraft, they will spend much more money to do so - and probably won't bother because the cost/benefit for new 100 seat aircraft is not as high as it is for larger mainline aircraft. DL then will be able to further lower its costs relative to them and help improve DL's financial performance relative to AA and UA, even after AA's merger and BK.

DL already competes fairly favorably against AA and UA; DL is the largest(er) carrier in far more of the markets which are to/from an AA, DL, or UA hub on which DL competes with one of the others than is AA or UA.

IN many cases, the reason can be easily traced to the fact that DL uses mainline aircraft or large RJs on at least some flights while AA and UA use smaller RJs.
DL's thesis that adding more mainline aircraft should result in an increased ability to shift revenue from AA and UA certainly seems to be supported by current market data.

Thus, the 717s have the potential to significantly increase DL's revenues at the expense of other carriers which will mean that a lot of cities that DL will shift revenue in markets that are in traditionally strong AA/UA regions.
And of course DL employees will benefit by DL's increased use of mainline aircraft.

BTW, pilot rumors are saying that the long-awaited decision regarding a top-up order involving Airbus or Boeing narrowbodies and widebodies is nearing announcement with Airbus being chosen to supply 30 current generation A321s and 10 new generation A330s which would be primarily used to upgauge flights over the Pacific and free up 777s which fly currently routes currently to Asia that are in range of the new 330s.
The deal was also intended to be part of DL's plan for A or B to take over some of the 50 seat RJs which are being removed from DL's fleet.

two things, well three things.
1) we are being told completely different things.......and they are investing into TechOps for.....hmmm Large thrust engines that are current sent out of house....for in house work. The biggest thing in the way *was* the test cell.
2) Pilots said the 100 737 order was going to be 321s too. amazing how that failed. (and the GUM base, DFW base (x5 or so now) etc.
3) ugh. scary how little they know. Just what 777 route would be able to go to 330?
The longest route, AFAIK, ever for a 330 was LAX-AKL. It regularly left PAX behind and was done on a much better(and powerful) aircraft than Delta has. (or will get) basically every 777 route is 500-1000nm longer than LAX-AKL. If airbus get nearly 1,500nm of range out of the 332 with the PW4000 engines gold bricks will begin to fly from my butt.

cliff notes, pilots are idiots look at the crap TA they voted yes for. (good for TechOps though. they saved the CF34 shop so thanks for that)

and IRIC this Long range crap you and the pilots keep talking about, was like 3 tons of extra MTOW. woohoo for 300nm of range lol.

note, They may order 3000 airbus tomorrow, that not my point.

 

[WorldTraveler]

two things, well three things.
1) we are being told completely different things.......and they are investing into TechOps for.....hmmm Large thrust engines that are current sent out of house....for in house work. The biggest thing in the way *was* the test cell.
2) Pilots said the 100 737 order was going to be 321s too. amazing how that failed. (and the GUM base, DFW base (x5 or so now) etc.
3) ugh. scary how little they know. Just what 777 route would be able to go to 330?
The longest route, AFAIK, ever for a 330 was LAX-AKL. It regularly left PAX behind and was done on a much better(and powerful) aircraft than Delta has. (or will get) basically every 777 route is 500-1000nm longer than LAX-AKL. If airbus get nearly 1,500nm of range out of the 332 with the PW4000 engines gold bricks will begin to fly from my butt.

cliff notes, pilots are idiots look at the crap TA they voted yes for. (good for TechOps though. they saved the CF34 shop so thanks for that)

and IRIC this Long range crap you and the pilots keep talking about, was like 3 tons of extra MTOW. woohoo for 300nm of range lol.

note, They may order 3000 airbus tomorrow, that not my point.

nothing in my post precludes your number from ALSO being true.

There has been plenty of acknowledgement that the pilot rumors are just that... just like maintenance rumors. None are any more credible than the other until the company makes an announcement.
In reality, A and B have both been fighting for this order and there have been other moving parts including the possibility of used widebodies which DL has also considered.
The reason it hasn't been announced is because the deal is not ready to be announced - and thus anyone's information is preliminary.

LAX- and MSP-NRT are both operated by 777s and are well within the range of a 330; LAX-NRT IS operated by a 333 certain times of the year.

Airbus has raised the MTOW of the 330s adding an hours worth of flying time; you haven't seen what routes the new generation 330s can do because they aren't being used yet.

I am neither for A or B. Airbus does make credible products; your employer flies a lot of their products in part because they merged with one of Airbus' largest customers.
New Airbuses will end up at DL sooner or later.
I suspect it will be a lot sooner than you like precisely because A is itching to turn DL into a new order Airbus customer again and because they have products which really can meet DL's needs at the prices DL wants to pay.

 

[southwind]

Are you on crack? LOLOLOLOL this is about the funniest s**t i have ever heard. 1) you weren't at Delta preBK 2) you didn't know jack diddly piss about the company. You gotta be an engine shop guy.

Where do I start?
Delta has more ASMs than any other carrier(and at one point it was more than any carrier combined)
Delta has (at least 1) lees week of vacation than
United has always made more.....even after Union dues.(at last check it was 200 bucks a pay check after dues were taken) Delta may have finally passed them, of course they still have 7 weeks of vacation.
Even after BK AA will still do more work in-house(counting TAESL) than Delta. (including 100s of 737NG HMVs. Those are being done at AAR for Delta)
United pays ~3% less for health care.

Do you even look at the charts DELTA post on this stuff? Good lawd. How about this, you save you 50-100 bucks, and I'll take the extra 3 weeks of vacation, 200 bucks and lower healthcare cost.
But you're winning......clearly.

Vote for a union then and stop whining, because they'll make everything better, just like they did at NW and AA !

 

[737823]

Vote for a union then and stop whining, because they'll make everything better, just like they did at NW and AA !

The ultimate bottom feeder agreement is at USAIR facilitated by the IAMAW.

Josh

 

[700UW]

Wrong again, the IAM M&R at US do more work in-house than AA or DL and US' mechanics have more sick time, and vacation time, and a defined benefit plan.

Keep spreading your lies josh, your nose is growing.

 

[737823]

Wrong again, the IAM M&R at US do more work in-house than AA or DL and US' mechanics have more sick time, and vacation time, and a defined benefit plan.

Keep spreading your lies josh, your nose is growing.

Again, you are a business unionist and to you it is all about keeping as many dues paying expendable commodity employees on the payroll. So you go around bragging about the scale of a pathetic sell out agreement that lowered the standards for all AMTs in the industry. You sound just like Overspeed. It's quality over quantity, DL AMTs don't have the IAM imposed on them, do substantial work in house and benefit from in-sourcing from other carriers. The IAM has cut back line stations in their sellout agreements. I know at BOS they cut jobs back in March 2010 when the F/A and pilot bases closed.

Josh

 

[700UW]

Are you that stupid?

And DL outsources most of their heavy mtc checks, DL is not hiring DL mechanics, they hired them as DGS employees.

There hasnt been section 6 negotiations at US since 1999, and the M&R still have a better CBA than AA and rules than DL.

How about those DL hangars in DFW and TPA, oh wait they closed them down.

 

[737823]

And what about all the Air Wisconsin employees that back filled mainline employees at UAL stations that went to Express? Are you equally proud of that?

Josh