DL plans MCO-GRU service

[WorldTraveler]

you go the ship numbers and MTOWs for the ATL-GRU flights?

 

[topDawg]

you go the ship numbers and MTOWs for the ATL-GRU flights?

you know as well as i do Delta doesn't assign ships to flights this far out.
 
I do know what management has said though.  

 

[WorldTraveler]

then we can pick up this conversation when the flights start, ok? and GRU and GIG have both added usable space to their longest runways since the merger.

and for now you can also acknowledge that the 332s do have a higher MTOW than they did at the date of the merger.

 

[topDawg]

then we can pick up this conversation when the flights start, ok? and GRU and GIG have both added usable space to their longest runways since the merger.

and for now you can also acknowledge that the 332s do have a higher MTOW than they did at the date of the merger.

i'm not going too. 
 
I haven't heard that. I wont say your wrong but im not saying you are right. (and as it is it doesn't make a damn.Its a simple fact that the PW 330s are now at the highest MTOW possible. And for the 333s it is not 242T) 

 

[WorldTraveler]

I didn't hear it. I've seen the WDRs that have been produced for 332 flights and know it to be true.

I'm also willing to admit that you might be right that unmodified PMNW 333s might end up being used on ATL-GRU.. but there are moving parts including changes to runway length and the interiors of those aircraft have been modified... don't know the effect.

further, it is possible that DL could choose to reroute cargo thru MCO because the chances are very high that the GRU-MCO aircraft will continue on to ATL anyway.

on purely a passenger basis, the current 333s should be able to operate northbound. but I also wouldn't be surprised if those annoying pop ups on Travel net get modified to include ATL-GRU (or GRU-ATL) on a 333.

and Airbus did say that some MTOW increases would be available to existing (pre 242T) 330s. Because that hasn't happened yet (the new build 242Ts have only been flying for less than 3 months) doesn't mean that won't happen down the road, even if it is not the full 242T.

 

[topDawg]

I didn't hear it. I've seen the WDRs that have been produced for 332 flights and know it to be true.

I'm also willing to admit that you might be right that unmodified PMNW 333s might end up being used on ATL-GRU.. but there are moving parts including changes to runway length and the interiors of those aircraft have been modified... don't know the effect.

further, it is possible that DL could choose to reroute cargo thru MCO because the chances are very high that the GRU-MCO aircraft will continue on to ATL anyway.

on purely a passenger basis, the current 333s should be able to operate northbound. but I also wouldn't be surprised if those annoying pop ups on Travel net get modified to include ATL-GRU (or GRU-ATL) on a 333.

and Airbus did say that some MTOW increases would be available to existing (pre 242T) 330s. Because that hasn't happened yet (the new build 242Ts have only been flying for less than 3 months) doesn't mean that won't happen down the road, even if it is not the full 242T.

I would love to see anything saying as much. 
 
Again the extra 4T of MTOW is due to extra fuel capacity being added. 

 

[WorldTraveler]

DL acquired NW with both the 332 and 333 with 510-2K MTOW.

Feel free to let me know what both are rated at today.

 

[topDawg]

DL acquired NW with both the 332 and 333 with 510-2K MTOW.

Feel free to let me know what both are rated at today.

again, simply not possible. 
The options for the A330-223 is 230T, 233T, 236T or 238T. The options for the A330-323 is 212T, 217T, 230T, 233T, 238T. 
 
And since NW had all A330-323Es (IIRC) that meant that they came from the factory at a minimum 230T MTOW. Pretty sure the 332s are also E models (which would mean 233T MTOW at least.)  
 
oh and finally, check your math because 510,000lbs is not 200,000T. 

 

[WorldTraveler]

don't need to check the math. I can obtain the ACTUAL MTOWs. I'm not as far out of the loop as you and others want to believe or without contacts at DL.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

don't need to check the math. I can obtain the ACTUAL MTOWs. I'm not as far out of the loop as you and others want to believe or without contacts at DL.

 
So are you getting access to information you shouldn't be?
Perhaps DLs corporate security dept. should investigate.

 

[WorldTraveler]

nope.

you haven't a clue what is available or not

given that the information which dawg provided confirms exactly what I have said all along that a higher gross weight version of the 333 is available compared to what NW operated, I'm just waiting for him to tell us what a/c and MTOW are used on the flights.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

nope.

you haven't a clue what is available or not.

 
Why is it now that you're able to easily obtain correct MTOW for the A330, but when the discussion comes up about the performance of B777 vs A330 you go out of your way to try to convince everybody that the MTOW information is unavailable and that a true comparisons cannot be made?
 
 
Spin your way out of that.
 
You wouldn't be fabricating facts or have a certain narrative would you?

 

[WorldTraveler]

where did I ever say that MTOW is unavailable... it is publicly known. taxes and overflight fees are based on it.



when you start off twisting and confusing US and North America, it's not hard to see where you are going for today.

step back, get another cup of coffee, and try again focused on the facts and not what you think they are.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

where did I ever say that MTOW is unavailable... it is publicly known. taxes and overflight fees are based on it.



when you start off twisting and confusing US and North America, it's not hard to see where you are going for today.

step back, get another cup of coffee, and try again focused on the facts and not what you think they are.

 
Look up any thread where the B777 vs A330 is discussed.
You  repeatedly insist that the MTOW listed by the manufacturers is incorrect.
 
Spin away!