DL rumored to acquire used A340-600s

[Kev3188]

You're nothing if not consistent...

 

[topDawg]

DL Tech Ops already offers services on the A340.

http://www.deltatechops.com/mro-capabilities/view/category/line-maintenance

DL has consistently shown that it uses its fleet complexity/diversity to gain expertise which it then markets as MRO services.

And DL still has one of the lowest maintenance CASMs among US airlines.

 
The services offered on the 340 are only things it has in common on the 330. Also at this time I do not know of a single operator who uses TechOps for anything dealing with the A340 

DL has people who know what they are doing. If they decide it is worth flying the A340 or any other aircraft, they will have the capabilities to do what they need to do. No one is doubting what is involved in operating a new fleet type as a DL aircraft. Given the number of fleet types DL operates, this certainly won't be their first or last rodeo.

And if they fly the aircraft, the chances are very high that they will also sell the services they do on their own aircraft to other airlines.

Again, DL Tech Ops does provide a certain level of service on the A340 RIGHT NOW - in addition to the total care programs they offer on other Airbus aircraft.

No not really. Again, it is things related to the A330. 
Also Line work isn't a good example. While each type is different, and will require difference training, at the end of the day low level line work is a good bit of the same thing. (esp. when dealing with a single OEM.) 
 
also i don't believe Delta offers training on the A340, just the A320/A330. 
 

 
uh....?

meanwhile, Lufthansa is planning to RETAIN in service its A340-300s to use them to operate LOW COST service to destinations where LH has lost market share to Middle East rivals.

http://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/news/27647-lufthansa-to-reactivate-a340s-for-low-cost-longhaul-ops-in-2015

LH is not a good example. Even today they have pressures from its government to fly Airbus. Because LH wont order the 777 (current) they have no choice but to fly the 340. 
Same reason AF still has A340s.... 
 
Having said that, this is about 600s not 300s. 
 
but it is very clear you don't know what your talking about. Delta isn't getting 340s. Done. Just like the 737-700s aren't leaving. Done. 

 

[700UW]

And LH just had announced a first quarter loss.

 

[WorldTraveler]

I doubt very seriously that the decision to hold onto a few 340s had anything to do with it.

You did read that the whole reason they were considering the plan was to fight back against the ME3 which are sucking passengers off of LH's system (and other Euro biggies as well).

I don't really care, dawg, what DL acquires as long as they get enough of them to grow the airline and do so at a rate that can take advantage of the market opportunities which are out there.

DL's widebody fleet plan is ultra-conservative. The 332s are being pushed beyond the way NW used them but they aren't equipped as 14 hour aircraft.

But I also know that DL is not going to order $150M aircraft to use to start new routes that may or may not work. That is just not the way DL works. Eventually they'll have to spin some serious money on new aircraft that are truly transpacific capable but they aren't going to do it until they know that the restructuring of DL's transpac system will work for the long run.

I also only said that the 73Gs would be traded if necessary to make a deal with WN work. WN didn't ask for the 73Gs and DL got a great deal anyway.

 

[eolesen]

I doubt very seriously that the decision to hold onto a few 340s had anything to do with it.

Perhaps not, but I'd be willing to bet that LH's spiraling into a 1Q14 loss is behind the decision to keep them around. It's also the reason why they're looking to sell one of the three divisions which currently makes up Lufthansa Systems (their IT outsourcing subsidiary).

The larger point still stands. You can't look at the decisions of LH, AF, or IB keeping the A340 in the same lens as you would with any other carrier. Operating the A340 is still considered a matter of national pride they can't avoid without severe backlash from the unions or politicians.

 

[WorldTraveler]

and if you can't compare what LH does, then you look solely at the economics of the deal which admittedly none of us have here.

What I do know is that the numbers do work for DL if you eliminate most of the ownership costs and reduce maintenance costs on the engine which was the RUMOR that supposedly was originally proposed.

You can ask why ALPA was asked to give a pay rate for the A340-600 if the deal has no bearing.

The papers likely aren't signed and perhaps by the time they are and DL gets ALPA to agree to fly it, someone else might come up with a better deal.

What is clear is that DL is doing very well in China and Asia outside of Japan while capacity needs to come out of Japan due to the devaluation of the yen.

Interestingly, AA is seeing similar results while UA is saying they are struggling in China because of the increased competition from other carriers.

Japan and China require different type of aircraft. The 333s that are coming do provide some growth and DL might be able to shuffle aircraft around to make some new opportunities work but DL needs more 14+ hour aircraft in order to fully maximize its growth opportunities while at the same time beginning to park the 744s, an aircraft which doesn't work on DL's Pacific network without a strong hub as DL has had at NRT.

Ironically, it is the relatively low power and take off weights of the 332s which is hurting DL's ability to push those aircraft as far as they otherwise could go at least on a sustained basis.

DL has to find some other aircraft has to be found to bring the gap until DL is willing to take the plunge on a multi-billion dollar order for new generation fully transpac capable aircraft which is what is specified in part in the RFP.

 

[700UW]

You seem to forget the fact, a DL pilot posted that the rates exist, new rates werent asked for.

 

[FWAAA]

And LH just had announced a first quarter loss.

True, but it was a lot smaller than last year's first quarter loss.   LH posted a full-year profit for 2013 despite the first quarter loss, and is projecting a larger profit in 2014, despite the first quarter loss. 
 
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-05-06/lufthansa-reduces-loss-as-efficiency-program-bears-fruit.html
 

Perhaps not, but I'd be willing to bet that LH's spiraling into a 1Q14 loss is behind the decision to keep them around. It's also the reason why they're looking to sell one of the three divisions which currently makes up Lufthansa Systems (their IT outsourcing subsidiary).

The larger point still stands. You can't look at the decisions of LH, AF, or IB keeping the A340 in the same lens as you would with any other carrier. Operating the A340 is still considered a matter of national pride they can't avoid without severe backlash from the unions or politicians.

Agreed.   Here's an article on the decision to un-retire the nine A340-300s:
 
http://www.travelpulse.com/news/airlines/new-lufthansa-ceo-un-retires-a340s-for-long-haul-flights.html
 
Fewer business class seats and more economy seats to those leisure destinations.   Reminds me of Arpey's decision to delete MRTC from the A300s and 757s during the dark days more than a decade ago so they could pack in even more economy passengers.    

 

[eolesen]

Fewer business class seats and more economy seats to those leisure destinations.   Reminds me of Arpey's decision to delete MRTC from the A300s and 757s during the dark days more than a decade ago so they could pack in even more economy passengers.

Exactly. By creating a subfleet, they are going to have to work a little harder to avoid damaging their primary product, but it's not an uncommon reality in Europe. BA had a vastly different product and density out of LGW to certain destinations (and still do as far as I recall) than they did out of LHR. Ten years ago, LH would have used Condor to compete, but they sold that to Thomas Cook. Likewise, KLM would have used Martinair.

Given the sunk costs, the risk of winding that down if it doesn't work is quite minimal.

DL won't have that lack of luxury. They've just made a huge marketing push about their fully flat and all-aisle access in premium cabins. (http://news.delta.com/2014-04-22-Delta-Becomes-Only-U-S-Carrier-with-Full-Flat-Bed-Seats-Featuring-Direct-Aisle-Access-on-All-Widebody-Overseas-Flights)

If they pick up the 340's, they'll need to offer similar density as they would on any other aircraft, including Economy Comfort, direct aisle access in the premium cabin, and wifi/IFE comparable to the A330 & B777 fleets.

Again, the math doesn't work in DL's favor when all things are considered. It does make for a good rumor, but I don't see it panning out the way WT does.

 

[WorldTraveler]

You seem to forget the fact, a DL pilot posted that the rates exist, new rates werent asked for.

DL has no pilot rate for the A340, in any version.

http://www.airlinepilotcentral.com/airlines/legacy/delta_air_lines


And DL would have to do the same thing with any other aircraft. DL hasn't bought a single int'l aircraft that is in the configuration it now uses.

I don't know the economics but it is pretty bold to assert that DL can't make the economics work w/o knowing all pieces of the puzzle.

The AA fan club is really afraid that DL will really have the capacity to grow deeply into Asia and will put a dent in AA's growth plans in the same region.

Even the 767 can fly well into China; SEA-PVG started out on a 767 and quickly got an upgrade to a 332 and is prime for getting another, perhaps one of the new 333s or even one of the 744s that DL would like to get out of NRT.

The 744 itself can do many potential routes from SEA with the right feed. UA extensively uses the 744 from SFO to Asia and still puts 60-70% connections on the flights even in a market where Asian carriers are far more prevalent than in SEA. SEA also has a geographic advantage over SFO and the costs of operating those flights are probably 10% less than from SFO.

DL needs more aircraft but it is hardly hogtied and it also is more than capable of making other aircraft including the 346s work if the economics on the manufacturer side are right.

 

[metopower]

I hate to put a nail in this rumor thread but those 340's are not in DL 's future.RA told the pilots at the last meeting that no 4 engine aircraft are in DL 's future after the 744.

 

[eolesen]

So now the reason it is a bad idea is because AA might be harmed?

I think I'm going to start calling you Jay. Or Debbie...

It's a bad idea simply because it's a bad idea, and not because of what you might see as another airline's fear of Delta.

 

[WorldTraveler]

I hate to put a nail in this rumor thread but those 340's are not in DL 's future.RA told the pilots at the last meeting that no 4 engine aircraft are in DL 's future after the 744.

and given that the only new 4 engine aircraft are HUGELY beyond DL's needs, no one expects they will be.

Again, I just want to see DL get some longhaul aircraft. If this aircraft is the way to do it and DL can make the math work for a few years, then I say let them do it.

But I have never said that it is the only option or even the best option - solely because I don't know all of the others, although I know that DL is actively looking at both used and new aircraft.

I don't care who gets harmed, or if anyone gets harmed at all.

DL's growth helps DAL stock. DAL stock has been the best performing stock in a lot of portfolios. The more DAL stock grows, the better.

 

[Glenn Quagmire]

WT talks turkey:

http://youtu.be/Mx3wrfhQaqk

Yeah, that's the ticket!

 

[eolesen]

Why don't you go check with your secret unnamed source to see if what Meto is saying has any truth to it...

Based on how flacid your arguments have become, I'll guess Meto may be the more informed party right now.