During the recent Q3 2025 Delta Air Lines earnings call, a senior executive at the airline made some interesting comments about the types of planes the airline will fly across the Atlantic, which can only be described as a swipe at United. However, do the comments actually make sense? Let’s take a look… thanks to Matt for flagging this.
In this post:
Delta’s strange stance on long haul narrow body flying
During Delta’s recent earnings call, Sheila Kahyaoglu, an Analyst at Jeffries, asked Delta President Glen Hauenstein the following about transatlantic flying:
“How do we think about Atlantic capacity next year, Glen, you mentioned more evenly dispersed. I guess how are you thinking about that? And maybe secondly, given your competitor just announced some new additions, how are you thinking about competitive capacity, your own network planning, as well as the A330, A350 product?”
Here’s part of how Hauenstein responded:
“Well, I think our product is best in class in the transatlantic. We continue to monitor our relative performance in terms of Net Promoter Scores. It’s leading right now, and it’s going to get much better as we continue to deliver new airplanes with the Delta One suites and with the enhanced Delta Premium Select and larger Delta C+ cabin. So I’m really excited about the product that we’re putting in market.”
“We’ve chosen not to fly narrow bodies in the transatlantic because of product and brand issues. And so we’re not going to go in that direction.”
Before I share my thoughts, let me provide a bit of context here:
- Hauenstein is presumably referencing how United is increasingly flying Boeing 737 MAXs in transatlantic markets, where the forward cabin is being sold as premium economy
- Hauenstein could also be referencing how United flies Boeing 757s in some transatlantic markets, where the forward cabin is marketed as Polaris business class, making it among the only non-direct aisle access long haul business class of any US airline
- It’s also possible that Hauenstein is indirectly referencing how Delta hasn’t ordered the Airbus A321XLR, while both American and United are going big on that plane, including for transatlantic flying
- Arguably what Hauenstein is saying isn’t actually accurate — Delta does fly Boeing 757s seasonally to Iceland, and I think most people would generally categorize that as a transatlantic flight
Are there product and brand issues with narrow bodies?
There’s no denying that some consumers don’t like the idea of flying narrow body planes on long haul flights — I’ve written about the pros and cons of this in the past. With the A321XLR being one of the newest aircraft in service, we’re going to see more transatlantic flights with single aisle planes.
That being said, of all the reasons to not fly narrow body planes on longer haul flights, product and brand issues seems like some of the more unusual justifications.
If we’re looking at United’s 737 MAX Europe expansion, for example, the key point to understand is that all of these flights are to destinations you wouldn’t otherwise be able to reach nonstop from the United States. For example, it’s not like United is flying 737 MAXs from Newark (EWR) to Frankfurt (FRA). Instead, the airline is flying them to places like Santiago de Compostela, Spain (SCQ), an airport that isn’t even served by any SkyTeam airline.
So do the perceived “product and brand issues” outweigh offering service to an airport that’s otherwise hard to get to? If you ask me, that seems like a stretch. It’s not like the airline is selling the forward cabin as business class. And if there are brand issues with this, then how does Delta explain flying 757s to Iceland?
There’s also an irony to Delta being concerned about product issues, when the carrier’s 767-300ERs have the worst international wide body business class product of any of the “big three” carriers, and those are used on all kinds of routes to Europe.
Regarding the A321XLR, I can totally understand if Delta has just decided it can’t make the economics of the jet work, given the low capacity of these planes, plus the labor costs at US airlines. At the same time, in the long run (once 767-300ERs are taken off transatlantic flights), Delta’s smallest long haul aircraft will be the A330. That means there will be all kinds of markets that American and United can make work with their A321XLRs, which Delta can’t make work, simply from a capacity standpoint. Will that turn out to be a competitive disadvantage for Delta?
Bottom line
In recent times, we’ve seen United increasingly use narrow body planes for its long haul expansion. This isn’t to replace existing routes, but instead, to add service to markets that simply couldn’t be served with wide body planes.
Delta executives claim the airline won’t move in that direction due to “product and brand issues,” though one certainly wonders about that logic. For one, Delta does use 757s for flights to places like Iceland. Furthermore, do the “product and brand issues” outweigh being able to offer service to destinations in the first place?
What do you make of Delta’s stance on long haul flying with narrow body planes?
Best in class?! Haaaa!!! B763, B764 (somewhat better), A332/333...all different J hard product. Hardly the best in class.
It is not about the aircraft but it is about profitability.
If a trans Atlantic route can be served profitably using narrowbody aircraft then an airline can potentially opt to serve it using a narrowbody aircraft.
The question is more about the number of trans Atlantic routes that could potentially be served in a profitable manner.
There is a reason why there are not so many narrowbody sering trans Atlantic routes today. I...
It is not about the aircraft but it is about profitability.
If a trans Atlantic route can be served profitably using narrowbody aircraft then an airline can potentially opt to serve it using a narrowbody aircraft.
The question is more about the number of trans Atlantic routes that could potentially be served in a profitable manner.
There is a reason why there are not so many narrowbody sering trans Atlantic routes today. I do not think the availability of the A321XLR will radically change the situation.
All examples given so far are anecdotal. There won't be any significant changes in the way airlines serve trans Atlantic market. With or without the A321XLR.
Let us revisit the situation in six years.
A single aisle aircraft 2 seat lay flat first class configuration is absolutely terrible. If you have the aisle lay flat seat, the window seat passenger has to literally crawl over your stretched out body to get out and if you have the window seat, you have to do the same. To me, that not worth it.
Well... although there may be (very few) narrow body aircrafts with non-direct aisle access on, it is far from the standard. Most long haul narrows that direct aisle access, exactly the same as widebodies (j
All a321s: jetblue, iberia, hawaiian, american, upcoming deltas, upcoming united) and others with "mostly" direct are the same as their widebodies anyways (10-15% of seats dont have direct aisle, which works fine for couples/anyone travelling together) like aer lingus,...
Well... although there may be (very few) narrow body aircrafts with non-direct aisle access on, it is far from the standard. Most long haul narrows that direct aisle access, exactly the same as widebodies (j
All a321s: jetblue, iberia, hawaiian, american, upcoming deltas, upcoming united) and others with "mostly" direct are the same as their widebodies anyways (10-15% of seats dont have direct aisle, which works fine for couples/anyone travelling together) like aer lingus, tap, sas)
I am a former ( retired thank God!) 50+ flights a year traveler, both continental and international. Single aisle transatlantic flights under 6 hrs in a single aisle are bearable in coach+, sort of. I tend to take E-Row windows seats for the legroom and nobody on 1 side.
I won't take an aisle seat - I detest spending hours with people bumping into me and standing with their ass in my face as...
I am a former ( retired thank God!) 50+ flights a year traveler, both continental and international. Single aisle transatlantic flights under 6 hrs in a single aisle are bearable in coach+, sort of. I tend to take E-Row windows seats for the legroom and nobody on 1 side.
I won't take an aisle seat - I detest spending hours with people bumping into me and standing with their ass in my face as they get up 5 times in 30 minutes to dig in the overhead, go to the lav, look for their charger/headphones/ tablet...
Wide body eliminates 1/2 the interruptions per flight by spreading the suffering around to a greater amount of amount of seats.
But now I don't fly so I don't care.
If I have to choose in between a 21N Mint and a 764 D1 over the pond I would happily choose the former. Maybe it's cheaper so I can save extra for a small lunch before my flight and skip the PREMIUM(TM, R) D1 Lounge scallop (PREMIUM(TM, R) paid wine options attached)
An interesting omission is how successfully single aisle aircraft are used to reach Hawaii. Not much further at all than east coast US to Europe. That’s not mentioned in the article. I’m not sure what DL’s bottom line philosophy is.
Those to Hawaii are day flights though. Most TATL flights are overnight. I've flown plenty of SEA/PDX to ATL red-eye flights...even in FC, you can't sleep on them.
I'm curious to hear what Tim thinks will happen to all of the JFK 767 routes once the 767-300ers are retired (especially all the summer seasonal routes). Will any route that can't support an A330 be dropped and shoved over to AMS/CDG connections? Will it be less than daily A330s? Everything that can't handle an A330 goes to ATL? Some predictions for the current 763/764 routes below would be appreciated.
EDI - This seems likely...
I'm curious to hear what Tim thinks will happen to all of the JFK 767 routes once the 767-300ers are retired (especially all the summer seasonal routes). Will any route that can't support an A330 be dropped and shoved over to AMS/CDG connections? Will it be less than daily A330s? Everything that can't handle an A330 goes to ATL? Some predictions for the current 763/764 routes below would be appreciated.
EDI - This seems likely to go from Mar-Jan to only summer on an A330
ARN - Dropped? A330 seems too big
CPH - Dropped? SAS?
BER - Has grown to a 764 route so likely can handle A330
PRG - Dropped? AMS 1-stop?
OPO - Dropped?
NAP - Sub Daily A330 in summer?
OLB - Dropped
CTA - Dropped
MLA - Dropped
SNN - Dropped
The next group likely can move to A330 without issue.
NCE
VCE (become seasonal?)
DUB
ZRH (unsure about this one)
LIS (would it drop to seasonal?)
I know BRU and GVA have already been dropped, but those seem like routes that would be perfect for a TATL narrowbody.
Most of this routes will likely continue.
Lagos was changed from a combo of B763 to JFK and ATL to A339 and A359 (306 seats)
Moving from 216 seats to 306 seats is alot but doable.
You keep harping on a probably singular exception of Delta flying to Iceland using a 757. This is very thin and nakedly biased reporting. Then again this really isn't news but opinion and I'll keep that in mind. I hope other people reading this will realize that as well.
No single isle plane should ever fly be flown over an ocean period. They hold no cargo, beyond cramped unless you are business or first and they just plane suck. The reason why airlines use them across the Atlantic is simple. Less people less means less flight crew so smaller paychecks. It's stupid but true. This is coming from a person who currently works for one of the Big 3 airlines in the States. Hell...
No single isle plane should ever fly be flown over an ocean period. They hold no cargo, beyond cramped unless you are business or first and they just plane suck. The reason why airlines use them across the Atlantic is simple. Less people less means less flight crew so smaller paychecks. It's stupid but true. This is coming from a person who currently works for one of the Big 3 airlines in the States. Hell l won't even fly a narrow body across the ocean if it's free in standby and it is in business/first. They are just sloppy planes. It's nice having the Grey hairs who have years and years of experience flying widebodies instead of pilots in their 30's and 40's doing the job in a small narrow body. Not trying to be offensive but l rather my dad be my Dr then a 30 year old who does everything on the computer now a days, lol
You obviously do not like Delta. You reference Iceland as a destination flown by narrow body aircraft. That all you can find? Respectfully, to everyone in iceland I don't really think it's a popular route. And you also forget to mention delta is the most profitable airline.Maybe that's because they know what they're doing.
I agree Delta's strategy is flawed. As the only one of the big 3 without the 787, especially the smaller -8, they have no replacement for the aging 767 or 757 in the 200 seat size with the range to fly transatlantic. Once they phase those 2 out, they will be left with a huge gap between their 190 seat, 3500nm range a321neo and their 280 seat, 7000nm range a330-900.
the A350 is a larger and more capable in every form than its counterpart in the 787.
DL has A330s - CEOs and NEOs - that are more closely aligned w/ the 787 in size and TATL capabilities.
the 332 is comparable in size to the 764; the 764 still has at least 5 more years in it and the 332 could have another 5 on top of that.
and it is...
the A350 is a larger and more capable in every form than its counterpart in the 787.
DL has A330s - CEOs and NEOs - that are more closely aligned w/ the 787 in size and TATL capabilities.
the 332 is comparable in size to the 764; the 764 still has at least 5 more years in it and the 332 could have another 5 on top of that.
and it is telling that UA has not taken delivery of a single 788 since the 789 became available. AA is alone in thinking that the 788 is a good solution; the 788 carries most of the weight of the 789 with far fewer passengers which is true of most "base" models of any aircraft type. Cost per seat are much higher for the shorter versions.
It is more notable that AA and UA are just two of the largest global carriers that are using 321NEOs that also have large widebody fleets esp. to/from continental Europe.
If the 321NEO made as much sense as many want to believe, there would be a lot more large global carriers to have ordered it but it is largely going to be used by airlines from Ireland and Iceland and smaller markets such as Scandinavia plus Spain where IB has long been much smaller across the Atlantic than it should be given its geography.
DL is more in line w/ global carriers in its fleet strategies than AA or UA.
TD says, "It is more notable that AA and UA are just two of the largest global carriers that are using 321NEOs that also have large widebody fleets esp. to/from continental Europe. If the 321NEO made as much sense as many want to believe, there would be a lot more large global carriers to have ordered it"
DL has 84 321NEOs and 71 more on order.
That's great that Delta won't fly narrowbodies across the Atlantic. It allows United to increase their domination by not having to worry about Delta encroaching on their expansion plans!
I agree Delta's strategy is flawed. As the only one of the big 3 without the 787, especially the smaller -8, they have no replacement for the aging 767 or 757 in the 200 seat size with the range to fly transatlantic. Once they phase those 2 out, they will be left with a huge gap between their 190 seat, 3500nm range a321neo and their 280 seat, 7000nm range a330-900.
As someone with family in the USA flying regularly economy from the UK. I would make the following comments. I am looking at value for money and comfort in economy. Some reasonable food and entertainment. My recent experiences have been Delta and Virgin very good. United OK and British Airways poor. I also find prices all over the place presently for the same dates next year LHR to JFK £200 difference between Virgin and Delta bizarre.
There would appear to be a case for the FAA (or whomever certifies U.S. airline seats) to specify a minimum seat width for each cabin class of seat. At check-in those oversized individuals could be invited to present themselves at a seat size check gauge (much like a hand luggage box). By doing so the ‘lard-asses’ (deliberate spelling) could be invited to purchase a larger seat to suit their oversized frame.
A win for...
There would appear to be a case for the FAA (or whomever certifies U.S. airline seats) to specify a minimum seat width for each cabin class of seat. At check-in those oversized individuals could be invited to present themselves at a seat size check gauge (much like a hand luggage box). By doing so the ‘lard-asses’ (deliberate spelling) could be invited to purchase a larger seat to suit their oversized frame.
A win for the airline (note the correct English spelling of airline), a win for fellow passengers who will not suffer the ‘overspill’ from the offending lard-asses and a win for the oversized passengers who should enjoy a more comfortable flight experience …. yes?
Narrow body jets, even with fewer seats are not what the public wants. My last 11 hour flight was terrible. Big guy in a middle seat should be illegal.
Illegal? Where I do agree it's uncomfortable. It's a chance we take when you fly economy.When you don't want to pay a lot of money, you can guarantee yourself a more comfortable ride.If you pay for an upgrade. Illegal sounds like a trump thing.
No Airline should be allowed to fly a single engine jet across an oceaneven if the engines can.)
Nobody wants to fly on a narrow body for more than 6 hours. That includes the crews
As a flight attendant, I hope they don't join other carriers and start using narrow bodies on TOs. With the loads to Europe as they've been, having no crew rest would be painful. (No, the four hour JFK-KEF is not considered transatlantic)
There's also no way to provide the amount of f&b service that you can on a widebody, so I get the point of brand protection (and when they say "best in class"...
As a flight attendant, I hope they don't join other carriers and start using narrow bodies on TOs. With the loads to Europe as they've been, having no crew rest would be painful. (No, the four hour JFK-KEF is not considered transatlantic)
There's also no way to provide the amount of f&b service that you can on a widebody, so I get the point of brand protection (and when they say "best in class" of course they are excluding the state-owned int'l carriers).
B6 does a JFK-LHR-JFK turn. That sounds like a miserable duty day, no matter what it pays.
No thank you. :-)
It's not 1933 with "state owned international carriers", Peter.
BA, Iberia, Aer Lingus, Aegean, Swiss, Austrian, Lufthansa.... are all fully private. Air France KLM and SAS are privately held with minority public stakes. That leaves ITA Airways, now in transition, and TAP Air Portugal as the last state owned transatlantic carriers in Europe.
Lost in all this hubhub is that Delta stock, despite continuing to have strong earnings reports, is down on the year (absolute and vs. United). Sure it beats (by a monster gap) AA, Southwest, and Alaska stock, but at some point, Delta is going to have to get better at selling its story to investors. Hate Kirby all you want - he’s up 4% in a down year for airlines
and yet UAL is still worth just 85% of DAL as a company (market cap).
UAL was so undervalued for so long that it had to move up - and it has from being worth just 55% of DAL.
Considering that UAL flies 10% more ASMs than DAL, it should be earning a whole lot more than DAL - but DAL's strategies, earnings and revenue all show that DAL's strategy of going for premium revenue...
and yet UAL is still worth just 85% of DAL as a company (market cap).
UAL was so undervalued for so long that it had to move up - and it has from being worth just 55% of DAL.
Considering that UAL flies 10% more ASMs than DAL, it should be earning a whole lot more than DAL - but DAL's strategies, earnings and revenue all show that DAL's strategy of going for premium revenue is delivering more for the bottom line than any other airline or air line strategy in the US.
and let's not forget that UA still enjoys a cost advantage of at least a half billion dollars per year and more if similar levels of profit sharing to DAL are included.
UAL employees have been fed Tulip covered koolaid for so long that they accept lower pay at their expense for UA's rah rah juice. Let us know the percentage of UA employees or customers that have benefited from UA's stock price movement; its execs certainly have gained.
and UAL underperforms DAL by a significant amount in customer satisfaction metrics.
Another blogger noted that AAL and UAL have some of the worst dissatisfaction scores including from search engine inquiries and posts about satisfaction.
UA is a high volume, lower quality airline with a massive orderbook and more debt that doesn't deliver premium revenue to the extent that DAL does.
"UAL is still worth just 85% of DAL as a company (market cap)....from being worth just 55% of DAL."
Exactly. Just a matter of time.
hope it not a strategy, esp. in business, but feel free to cling to it.
UA is undervalued relative to DL because
1. UA does not generate profits on a consistent basis comparable to DL even though UA has a significant labor cost advantage - which the market recognizes will likely fall.
2. UA has more long-term debt than DL but also more cash which they need because they don't have the lines...
hope it not a strategy, esp. in business, but feel free to cling to it.
UA is undervalued relative to DL because
1. UA does not generate profits on a consistent basis comparable to DL even though UA has a significant labor cost advantage - which the market recognizes will likely fall.
2. UA has more long-term debt than DL but also more cash which they need because they don't have the lines of credit that DL has. DL has a higher credit rating - investment grade - while UA does not.
UA has a much larger order book which is a liability. DL has been more than capable of coming up w/ the aircraft it needs to grow and also to get orders when it needs them - but it has a much smaller orderbook which is perceived by investors as safer.
and specific to the 787, rumors continue that an order is coming from DL and will include some early delivery positions - within the next 2-3 years - as part of an order readjustment w/ one of DL's partners. DL still has 20 35Ks due for delivery likely in the 2027-29 time period with 20 options likely in a similar time.
DL has no shortage of widebody capacity available on top of narrowbody deliveries and options but far less stress on its balance sheet.
It is not likely that UA's market cap will exceed DL's until they exceed DL's earnings - which is not likely to happen this year - and reduce its balance sheet disadvantages relative to DL.
Rumors? From the guy who dismisses firm orders at least for non-DL airlines. Too funny.
It’s just a matter of time.
well, no, I don't dismiss rumors for anyone. But I do use CONFIRMED statements and recognize they hold far more credibility than rumors for anyone.
UA has not publicly stated their retirement plans for any of their widebodies or the 757s.
They may end up using a high percentage of their widebody aircraft deliveries for growth and not retire older widebodies but that just means that DL's cost advantage will grow. Older aircraft are just...
well, no, I don't dismiss rumors for anyone. But I do use CONFIRMED statements and recognize they hold far more credibility than rumors for anyone.
UA has not publicly stated their retirement plans for any of their widebodies or the 757s.
They may end up using a high percentage of their widebody aircraft deliveries for growth and not retire older widebodies but that just means that DL's cost advantage will grow. Older aircraft are just less cost efficient. Polaris seats don't change that.
and the difference in fleet between DL and UA (and AA) will come down to capabilities far more than aircraft size over the next five years.
the 35K will simply be more capable and efficient than anything that AA or UA have in their fleet or can get in the next 5 years.
DL will be opening routes and growing capacity with the 35K that no 787 can do without far fewer seats than AA or UA have on their current or publicly announced plans. The 350 is just a much more capable airplane.
DL will get far more benefit from having a more capable and efficient plane at the top of its fleet than AA or UA will get from having the smallest international airplane in the XLR.
Is a very good documentary on youtube on delta, their thought process.And why they fly the aircraft that they do?You should watch it.You might enjoy it.
I'm entertained by the suggestion that Delta is "best in class" on TATL. Ignoring that one TATL route by EK, there's AF which is leagues above Delta, LX and OS that also blow DL out of water, etc.
Delta seats in general are so narrow and tight that being stuck in one for more than 4 hours or so would be torture. The constant spillage of one passenger into another’s space (the battle for the armrest) is why I hate flying on delta.
There is neither comfort nor plus in Comfort+
Delta is barely above Spirit airlines IMO
and yet any single person's opinion means nothing in an industry that serves one billion customers/year just to/from/within the US.
DL consistently ranks at the upper end of US airlines in customer satisfaction among US airlines.
and given that seats are pretty much universally produced and used for the same aircraft types by airlines around the world, the notion that seat width is different for the same aircraft is a fantasy of your imagination.
Delta seats in general are so narrow and tight that being stuck in one for more than 4 hours or so would be torture. The constant spillage of one passenger into another’s space (the battle for the armrest) is why I hate flying on delta.
There is neither comfort nor plus in Comfort+
Delta is barely above Spirit airlines IMO
So this is basically about United flying 737s to places like Santiago de Compostela on what I assume will be less than daily service on a seasonal basis. It’s hard to believe this is going to be a big money making for United. Maybe Delta doesn’t think it’s worth keeping a narrow body aircraft and its pilots in ETOPS certification for routes that don’t seem to be real moneymakers.
Delta flies narrowbodies to Hawaii which requires ETOPS so, no, this isn't about ETOPS or pilots.
It is about product consistency. DL does not believe that flying a domestic configured narrowbody that doesn't even have a premium economy cabin comparable to what UA offers on its widebodies is conducive to building its brand, esp. all the way to continental Europe.
United fans would love to tell you how great their onboard product is but...
Delta flies narrowbodies to Hawaii which requires ETOPS so, no, this isn't about ETOPS or pilots.
It is about product consistency. DL does not believe that flying a domestic configured narrowbody that doesn't even have a premium economy cabin comparable to what UA offers on its widebodies is conducive to building its brand, esp. all the way to continental Europe.
United fans would love to tell you how great their onboard product is but they have never had brand consistency because they (and CO) have used 757s for decades. The MAX is a whole new level of brand inconsistency that AA and DL simply don't do.
and that is before even getting to the XLR which doesn't perform as proposed and has much higher costs per seat mile than widebodies.
DL, as usual, figures out the strategy that the industry needs to pursue and the rest of the airlines figure it out. UA just can't let go of the notion that adding another half dozen dots to its route map is LESS important than providing a consistent, profitable product.
TD says, “ Delta flies narrowbodies to Hawaii”
So DL flies narrowbody aircraft to leisure destinations five to six hours from the west coast like UA is serving from the east coast, but it’s different with regards to the brand? So funny.
It’s just a matter of time.
Hawaii is part of the US and is served ALMOST entirely by widebodies now. It used to be widebodies even if they were predominantly domestic configured.
If you don't know the difference between Hawaii and continental Europe, I'm not sure anyone can help you.
and, yes there is about a 2 hour difference in flight length.
UA has the right aircraft for the right market. The brand excuse for not having the lift is laughable.
Not to get too far into the weeds but American flys lots of 321s between the West Coast and Hawaii, many more than Delta which seems to only fly from Seattle to Hawaii. Flying ETOS across the North Atlantic is a different animal. American has flown dozens of proving/training flights across the Atlantic to qualify check pilots and to demonstrate knowledge in other operational areas. They will need to qualify line pilots based in New...
Not to get too far into the weeds but American flys lots of 321s between the West Coast and Hawaii, many more than Delta which seems to only fly from Seattle to Hawaii. Flying ETOS across the North Atlantic is a different animal. American has flown dozens of proving/training flights across the Atlantic to qualify check pilots and to demonstrate knowledge in other operational areas. They will need to qualify line pilots based in New York too. This has got to be costing AA a fortune. I don’t blame Delta for not wanting to do it.
Unless you live in NYC or Boston, you’re not taking a direct TATL flight to a small destination. So you’re connecting anyway.
I’d rather fly a widebody across the Atlantic and a small plane intra-Europe than a 737/A321 to JFK/BOS and another one to Europe.
Anyone >6ft tall can barely stand up straight on a 737/A321. The bathrooms are tiny. There’s one aisle and you can’t walk around or just stretch in the large...
Unless you live in NYC or Boston, you’re not taking a direct TATL flight to a small destination. So you’re connecting anyway.
I’d rather fly a widebody across the Atlantic and a small plane intra-Europe than a 737/A321 to JFK/BOS and another one to Europe.
Anyone >6ft tall can barely stand up straight on a 737/A321. The bathrooms are tiny. There’s one aisle and you can’t walk around or just stretch in the large galleys or pass-throughs between aisles. Everyone boards through one door, so even the premium cabin is crowded/busy during boarding.
I'm totally for Widebody aircraft for long haul flights , the A321XLR is a nice plane but having direct aisle access and at least 6 lavatory for paxs to use
Sam says, “Unless you live in NYC or Boston, you’re not taking a direct TATL flight to a small destination. So you’re connecting anyway.”
From those smaller US cities you would be connecting twice to these smaller European cities without the service direct from EWR. That’s the whole point.
UA doesn't serve those smaller cities from EWR.
There are more than two dozen cities that have nonstop service to Europe. and they constitute a far larger number of TATL passengers than UA connects via EWR to unique destinations.
as hard as it is for you to admit, UA really isn't adding anything unique. They are cheapening the passenger experience to carry alot more volume .
TD, “ UA doesn't serve those smaller cities from EWR”
Poor TD.
Bottom line, I’m not flying a narrow body more than 6 hours.
Even if it’s lie-flat and is nonstop to your final destination? Like, say you live in NYC and want to fly to Porto, Portugal. You’d rather take EWR-LIS-OPO, because the transatlantic portion is on TAP in an a330, a wide-body aircraft, even though you’ll have a layover in Lisbon and the connection to OPO is on a CRJ or ERJ; as opposed to EWR-OPO nonstop on TAP in their new a321neo. Both lie-flat, basically the...
Even if it’s lie-flat and is nonstop to your final destination? Like, say you live in NYC and want to fly to Porto, Portugal. You’d rather take EWR-LIS-OPO, because the transatlantic portion is on TAP in an a330, a wide-body aircraft, even though you’ll have a layover in Lisbon and the connection to OPO is on a CRJ or ERJ; as opposed to EWR-OPO nonstop on TAP in their new a321neo. Both lie-flat, basically the same seat, but you’d prefer the stop in Lisbon and the extra flight? I donno man, I think you’re missing out. Gotta evolve!
Everytime I fly trans Atlantic on Delta I am dissapointed that the plane is so old.
then you would be devastated flying United; their widebody average fleet age is by far the oldest of any major global carrier in the world.
Tim’s right; I’d take an ancient 763 with lie-flat and DeltaOne lounge at JFK or BOS, over a lame 737 with only recliners in-front… it’s a no-brainer!
1990, you’ll never have that option, as DL doesn’t fly 767s anywhere UA operates the 737.
As Ben said, no SkyTeam carrier operates a flight to SCQ.
Engel says “ Everytime I fly trans Atlantic on Delta I am dissapointed that the plane is so old.”
Yep, a large percentage of DL’s widebody fleet has very old and outdated interiors. 100% of UA’s int’l widebody fleet has been updated with new interiors and new suites and premium seats.
and yet DL's 767s compete w/ UA's 757s on about a dozen routes.
The comparison is DL's widebodies to UA's 757s as hard as it is for you to grasp.
DL is not willing to fly to longhaul international destinations on a domestic narrowbody if there is no premium travel demand.
It really isn't a difficult concept for anyone w/ half a brain to grasp.
There simply is a level of traffic that is not...
and yet DL's 767s compete w/ UA's 757s on about a dozen routes.
The comparison is DL's widebodies to UA's 757s as hard as it is for you to grasp.
DL is not willing to fly to longhaul international destinations on a domestic narrowbody if there is no premium travel demand.
It really isn't a difficult concept for anyone w/ half a brain to grasp.
There simply is a level of traffic that is not worth chasing for DL even if UA thinks it is worth their while - even as they offer far fewer domestic flights than DL - both on a systemwide basis and from NYC.
UA has 228 wide-body aircraft and another 187 WB on order. DL has 177 wide-body aircraft and 28 on order. UA will receive more new wide-body aircraft by the end of next year than DL has on order total. UA is bigger than DL in TATL & TLAT and bigger than DL & AA combined in TPAC.
There is no comparison when it comes to wide-body international flying and the gap is widening. It's just a matter of time.
I’m no Delta fan but I agree with them completely.
Like them or not, Delta is trying to position themselves as a premium airline. Airlines based in the USA allow passengers from coach to use the front bathroom on narrow body flights which can lead to a cavalcade of foot traffic for the passengers up front. That pretty much wipes out the premium premise. That’s also why I would studiously avoid flying long haul on a single aisle plane.
Yeah, the narrowbody bathroom problem is something that needs to be solved.
Qantas has already had to fix their lavatory ratio because it's so bad.
At least ‘Qantas never crashed.’
You forget that the A321-XLR has turned out to be very unpopular given that required fuel-tank redesign has robbed the aircraft of anywhere close to its promised range. I think that’s largely why Delta hasn’t ordered it yet. And their Max10’s are still 2-3 years away.
Could you explain what the “required fuel-tank redesign” is? Thanks.
The upcoming United XLR with lie flat Polaris will arguably be better than D1 on Delta’s 767 (especially 300s) anyway.
and DL is winding down the 763s; when you compare two planes of vastly different generations, it isn't hard to make a good comparison.
The comparison to the 767-300ER is UA's 757s and UA's 76s
and the comparison to UA's 777s and 787s are DL's existing A350s and 339s - which have far better cabins.
UA won on the 767 competition and yet DL hasn't used its 767s largely as direct competitors to UA's 767s...
and DL is winding down the 763s; when you compare two planes of vastly different generations, it isn't hard to make a good comparison.
The comparison to the 767-300ER is UA's 757s and UA's 76s
and the comparison to UA's 777s and 787s are DL's existing A350s and 339s - which have far better cabins.
UA won on the 767 competition and yet DL hasn't used its 767s largely as direct competitors to UA's 767s or other airlines newer widebodies. DL's 763s have competed domestically and against UA 757s.
Tim, you talk about DL winding down their 767s but act as if UA will fly their 757s into eternity.
DL will be flying their inconsistent and substandard 767 product long after the UA 757s are domestic only.
UA will begin taking delivery of their A321XLRs in a few months. They will replace the 757s. As it is, the 757s operate a small fraction of international flights, as opposed to the DL 767s, which will...
Tim, you talk about DL winding down their 767s but act as if UA will fly their 757s into eternity.
DL will be flying their inconsistent and substandard 767 product long after the UA 757s are domestic only.
UA will begin taking delivery of their A321XLRs in a few months. They will replace the 757s. As it is, the 757s operate a small fraction of international flights, as opposed to the DL 767s, which will be around on international flights until 2030.
And where are these "many" cities where DL operates widebodies while UA sends 737s? Nuuk? Ponta Delgada, Santiago de Compostela?
USAF is still flying several B-52H from 1960… United can milk another decade at least outta their 757 from the early 90s.
UA has provided no replacement plan for its 757s, 767s or 777s.
While it is perfectly to be assumed that UA will retire some of its fleet, we hear endlessly including from you that UA is receiving so many widebodies that it will be growing endlessly.
You can't have it both ways, Mark.
Either UA will use substantial portions of its orderbook to replace older aircraft or it will grow.
You cannot argue that UA...
UA has provided no replacement plan for its 757s, 767s or 777s.
While it is perfectly to be assumed that UA will retire some of its fleet, we hear endlessly including from you that UA is receiving so many widebodies that it will be growing endlessly.
You can't have it both ways, Mark.
Either UA will use substantial portions of its orderbook to replace older aircraft or it will grow.
You cannot argue that UA has a competitive product on its widebodies because you don't want to admit that they will have to retire some aircraft while hiding behind narrowbody retirements because everyone knows that the 757 is vastly uncompetitive.
Tell us the equipment DL and UA use from BOS/JFK/EWR/IAD to DUB, SNN, EDI, KEF and more.
Yes, DL uses widebodies including the 767 and 330 to a number of destinations that UA uses 757s
the entire notion that UA has a superior product to DL's 767s is completely false.
DL's 767s are far superior to UA's 757s and DL uses its 767s in many markets where UA uses 757s.
TD says, “ UA has provided no replacement plan for its 757s, 767s or 777s.”
Shocked that a self-described ‘airline analyst’ is unaware of UA’s fleet plan that has been communicated repeatedly by UA management.
UA has released no publicly available replacement plan for its widebodies or 757s.
Feel free to post a link to it if it exists.
You’re the ‘analyst’. Right? So funny.
Would make a lot of sense for DL to get 788s after they get their -10's. They're basically 1:1 for 767s but ~25% more efficient (and capable ... could open up routes from ATL or NY to Asia to avoid stopping in ICN or LAX). Understand they're not as efficient as the -9 or '10 on a per seat basis, but they're right-sized for many markets and could get whatever seat Delta wants to put on it unlike a 76.
I'd rather fly on a spacious 767, even with lower cabin pressure, than on a cramped 787. Of course, this is only true for coach.
TBH. I think we (the readers of any airline blog) are fairly biased about airlines and business class. I would put money that the average customer, whether premium or economy, does not care that much about the plane they will fly across the ocean. If they want business class, they are expecting food and sleep, not much else. I don't think the average person will care that much about whether it is on a narrow...
TBH. I think we (the readers of any airline blog) are fairly biased about airlines and business class. I would put money that the average customer, whether premium or economy, does not care that much about the plane they will fly across the ocean. If they want business class, they are expecting food and sleep, not much else. I don't think the average person will care that much about whether it is on a narrow body 757. Regarding United flying the Max, as long as they market the flight fairly and clearly that it is Premium economy, I don't think they will have any problem selling to those destinations. It's all anecdotal, as I have no data or numbers or research to back it up, but I'm a firm believer.
Also totally anecdotal on my end, but as others have mentioned in the comments, I think the introduction of narrow bodies as common trans-Atlantic flight options has been one of the most noticeable and talked about shifts in long-haul travel among non-travel-nerds. It is a remarkably different experience to have far lower ceilings and no space in the galleys to get up and stretch.
Delta is evil. Delta is scum. Its employees should be fed back into the bowels of Hell that they emerged from.
ORD …. Some facts about DL according to the SkyTrax 2025 Customer Survey ….
Best Economy Class in North America
Best Economy Class Onboard Catering in North America
Best Business Class in North America
Best Premium Economy Class in North America
Cleanest Airline in North America
Best Airline Staff in North America
Best Cabin Crew in USA
On believes that you might be best advised to put those facts into your pipe and smoke it old bean, yes?
Skytrax rankings lmao, quoting the pay to buy ranking agency (more accurate consulting agency) for a frequent flyer is hilarious
@ORD_Is_My_Second_Home This has to be satire. If not, it sounds unhinged.
Not satire. My response to Delta fanpoodles like Tim and his fake British identity Aero, who cites Skytrax, who rates airlines on how much bribes are given. Delta is the worst airline in North America and the fanboys won't admit it, so I fight back.
ORD, you are so predictable and so blind to the reality of your bias.
Try reading CNT, Forbes or NYT (all respected U.S. media outlets), they all agree with the 2025 SkyTrax customer survey.
However, one doubts that you would have the courage to explore the facts as they will blow your biased opinion clean out of the water.
Don't care about anyone else's opinion. I just care about mine, worked out from observation and experience, which is that Delta FAs treat anyone other than Diamonds and D1s as garbage and that their ground ops are incredibly unhelpful, especially during irrops. I don't like any airline that tries to trap me in Minneapolis for two days due to a missed connecting flight. That was literally the last time I flew Delta, because I left...
Don't care about anyone else's opinion. I just care about mine, worked out from observation and experience, which is that Delta FAs treat anyone other than Diamonds and D1s as garbage and that their ground ops are incredibly unhelpful, especially during irrops. I don't like any airline that tries to trap me in Minneapolis for two days due to a missed connecting flight. That was literally the last time I flew Delta, because I left MSP on another airline, worked out an alternate route, and flew the superior United to my destination.
Thank you for that candid response, it speaks volumes about your outlook upon life and especially your character too. One is not surprised to learn that you have been treated like “Garbage” and suspect that you experience this behaviour on a regular basis. One reaps what one sows ORD.
I'm not treated like garbage on UA or AA and I haven't witnessed FAs treating people like garbage on those airlines either. DL's crap-don't-stink attitude permeates the whole airline.
ORD..2nd home whatever..you need medical help badly.
Definitely satire. Him 'admitting' that it isn't, is 100% part of the bit. Bah! (Come back to VFTW, Gary misses you O'Hare!)
I comment there when something interests me enough to comment. Gary hasn't put out anything that interests me enough to comment. I hate turkey, for instance.
I hate Turkey, too. Historically, the way the Ottomans treated the Armenians (and Greeks). And, Erdogan, currently, is an authoritarian. Not good. Oh.. wait.. the food?
given the challenges DL has been having with maintaining new international routes, i suppose there's an argument for focusing on proven thick routes rather than more experimental long and thin ones, which United seems to have more success making stick.
By ‘success’ are you referring to the incredibly unreliable route United was trying to Greenland? Psh, bud, it didn’t go well…
Pssst, then why is it coming back next year?
I hate to tell them, but most modern airline aircraft are wide bodies. What they call wide body are actually really wide body. Compared to when aviation started they are all huge thick round vessels.
*thicc
United isn’t the only airline flying transatlantic without direct aisle access. We just flew on a Delta A350 AMS-ATL and it was 2X2. Old school.
No way will we pay for that again.
DL has never had 2-2 in J on an A350. They did fly some A350s they bought from Latam that had 2-2-2 in J (ugh!). But, last I heard they all had been converted or were in the process of being converted as we speak. Maybe you just got unlucky and got one of the last flights. DL did at times fly these 2-2-2 jokes LAX-AKL.
there are precisely 2 ex-Latam A350s remaining in service. and one will leave service and head for conversion.
Good for finding the small anecdote to hypocritically pretend that, even at its most, the ex-Latam A350 fleet was far smaller than UA's 757 fleet which has 2X2 business class.
So, was the other part of the "we" you talked about on your trip so incalcitrant that they wouldn't let you get to the aisle?
And you...
there are precisely 2 ex-Latam A350s remaining in service. and one will leave service and head for conversion.
Good for finding the small anecdote to hypocritically pretend that, even at its most, the ex-Latam A350 fleet was far smaller than UA's 757 fleet which has 2X2 business class.
So, was the other part of the "we" you talked about on your trip so incalcitrant that they wouldn't let you get to the aisle?
And you do realize that 2/3 of the seats on the ex-Latam A350s have direct access aisle seats but it IS half for UA's 757s?
and 44% of passengers in economy on an A350 have aisle seats but only 33% on a 737, 757 or 320?
The reason these articles are so "fun" is because it is so easy to drive trucks through the flawed logic so many of you bring to the party
Tim says, "there are precisely 2 ex-Latam A350s remaining in service. and one will leave service and head for conversion."
How long ago did DL buy these LATAM aircraft? Wasn't it five years ago? Yikes!
how long ago did UA buy a bunch of MAXs and 787s that are years behind schedule? MORE than 5 years ago.
but, in your bizarre world, if DL suffers from supply chain constraints impacting 9 aircraft, DL is bad but if UA repeatedly misses its fleet goals by hundreds of aircraft - UA thought it would have over 1300 aircraft by this point in time, it is totally to be excused.
the hypocrisy is stunning
So emotional Tim.
United installed Polaris Suites, Premium Plus and Economy Plus in all of its 205 international wide body aircraft in six years during Covid with far more J seating than the 77 DL finished wide bodies that took eight years to install.
Good luck to DL getting to 50% before the end of 2026!
there is nothing emotional, son.
These are facts that you can't stand to hear, let alone accept
polaris was obsolete the day Delta rolled out Delta One Suites. DL now has 80 widebodies, almost half of its widebody fleet, with D1 Suites. UA has precisely zero.
You clearly aren't very good at math - but you obviously don't want to be.
DL will reach 50% of its widebody fleet w/ D1 Suites as soon as...
there is nothing emotional, son.
These are facts that you can't stand to hear, let alone accept
polaris was obsolete the day Delta rolled out Delta One Suites. DL now has 80 widebodies, almost half of its widebody fleet, with D1 Suites. UA has precisely zero.
You clearly aren't very good at math - but you obviously don't want to be.
DL will reach 50% of its widebody fleet w/ D1 Suites as soon as the last 767s that are being retired leave the fleet; DL still has 2 more 350s to be delivered and 2 more to be converted.
So, you, as usual, are wrong.
DL WILL reach 50% by spring
Meanwhile UA will be at less than 5%. FIVE
UA installed their Polaris Suites (w/o 3-foot doors), Premium Plus and Economy Plus in 100% of its int’l wide body fleet (206 aircraft) at three times the rate DL (77 aircraft over eight years) did with far more premium seats. Hopefully, DL can get above 50% next year. Yikes!
Why is DL so inept at aircraft interiors? Do those brand new A321 NEOs have engines or temporary first class seats yet or are they still sitting idle on a ramp in Europe? Yikes!
I'm going to ask the same rhetorical question I ask often. Why do so many people who comment on airline blogs tend to argue that every airline has to have precisely the same business model?
they don't need to be the same.
The difference is in accurately and truthfully noting the difference between products and not Teflon-like trying to argue against product reality which only a relatively few really believe - or state.
TD says, "they don't need to be the same. The difference is in accurately and truthfully noting the difference between products and not Teflon-like trying to argue against product reality which only a relatively few really believe - or state."
Finally! Tim get it. Bravo!
just say it.
Even the first class domestic cabin on a UA 737MAX is not even close to comparable to premium economy on a UA widebody.
and UA's 757s are the worst product in business class of the US international fleet.
finally, every US carrier widebody has a higher percentage of aisle seats in economy than a 320 family or 737/757 family aircraft has
Don't worry Tim the onboard product on those cool long thin routes will improve tremendously as UA puts those 50 A321 XLRs with lie-flat beds and 100% aisle access that start coming next year. I am sure Quayle will keep them flying hard with all the markets he finds.
yes, and DL's onboard product will improve when its 767-300ERs are retired
the difference is that DL IS retiring its 763s while UA and you keep these "but we've gotta grow first and then we'll retire aircraft" mantra.
and even if the XLR has a competitive premium cabin, it still has just 1/3 of the seats as aisles in economy.
DL's statement about the inferiority of narrowbody products is completely valid and accurate...
yes, and DL's onboard product will improve when its 767-300ERs are retired
the difference is that DL IS retiring its 763s while UA and you keep these "but we've gotta grow first and then we'll retire aircraft" mantra.
and even if the XLR has a competitive premium cabin, it still has just 1/3 of the seats as aisles in economy.
DL's statement about the inferiority of narrowbody products is completely valid and accurate - not to speak of economics including the ability to carry revenue
...cargo revenue
@Tim, to your point of "Even the first class domestic cabin on a UA 737MAX is not even close to comparable to premium economy on a UA widebody."
Um, no they are more or less the same. Even if there are some marginal differences in sizing and the lack of a footrest, they are definitely "close to comparable"
Daniel,
the domestic first class seat on UA's 737MAXs is NOT the same seat that UA uses for premium economy on its widebodies. If you don't know the difference, then I would suggest you look at sources like aerolopa or United's own website.
it is precisely because people like you want to nitpick at every perceived difference in competitor offerings but excuse mile wild differences in UA's offerings that it is easy for me...
Daniel,
the domestic first class seat on UA's 737MAXs is NOT the same seat that UA uses for premium economy on its widebodies. If you don't know the difference, then I would suggest you look at sources like aerolopa or United's own website.
it is precisely because people like you want to nitpick at every perceived difference in competitor offerings but excuse mile wild differences in UA's offerings that it is easy for me to have a field day.
DL is absolutely right that UA is cheapening its product by using domestic configured aircraft for longhaul international flights io/from continental Europe
I asked a simple rhetorical question and look at all the angst it engendered. Wow!
‘Just asking questions…’ naw, man. None of that was in good faith. You knew you were just trolling our pal, Tim. C’mon!
When I read Delta thinks they have the best transatlantic nearly shot Woodford out my nose laughing so hard.
Delta may win the award for the most inconsistent transatlantic product, but not the best. There is not a single reputable travel writer who would go on record calling DL’s TATL product tops. There is no overcoming DLs 767s. They are crap. They are awful. They are the worst hard product crossing the sky, with...
When I read Delta thinks they have the best transatlantic nearly shot Woodford out my nose laughing so hard.
Delta may win the award for the most inconsistent transatlantic product, but not the best. There is not a single reputable travel writer who would go on record calling DL’s TATL product tops. There is no overcoming DLs 767s. They are crap. They are awful. They are the worst hard product crossing the sky, with the exception of the MAX that US is planning.
That said, the MAX will be on. Few UA routes, unlike DL and their 60 767s they fly across the pond.
where did DL itself say that they have the best transatlantic product?
and since you want to talk facts, DL doesn't even have 60 767s remaining and that is before supposedly 7 more will be retired this winter.
at least 20 are used for domestic routes including transcons and Hawaii.
and the 764s and 763s have different products and the 764 gets far better ratings than the 763 by, wait, wait, actual customers.
...where did DL itself say that they have the best transatlantic product?
and since you want to talk facts, DL doesn't even have 60 767s remaining and that is before supposedly 7 more will be retired this winter.
at least 20 are used for domestic routes including transcons and Hawaii.
and the 764s and 763s have different products and the 764 gets far better ratings than the 763 by, wait, wait, actual customers.
and ANY 767 has the highest percentage of aisle seats compared to not just any other widebody but most certainly compared to the 737 or 320 families.
The fixation on an inch of business class seat space to the exclusion of every other seat on an aircraft.
and the DL 767s are leaving the fleet with a possible 787 order accelerating the 767 exit while UA seems committed to growing its MAX TATL usage.
Why didn't DL put Delta One Suites on their 767s?
because there are no suites on ANY 767, and that includes UA's 767s.
Polaris is not a SUITE product as even others have noted.
Polaris is a high density business class product.
UA traded consistency for a product across its widebody fleet for having a best in class product. Delta One Suites were introduced on the A350 about the same time UA rolled out Polaris.
DL has 80 aircraft with D1 Suites on the 350/339...
because there are no suites on ANY 767, and that includes UA's 767s.
Polaris is not a SUITE product as even others have noted.
Polaris is a high density business class product.
UA traded consistency for a product across its widebody fleet for having a best in class product. Delta One Suites were introduced on the A350 about the same time UA rolled out Polaris.
DL has 80 aircraft with D1 Suites on the 350/339 and that number will be over 150 aircraft by the turn of the decade.
UA, right now, has precisely ZERO aircraft w/ suites.
as for the comment below,
UA has NOT committed to retiring widebodies and has also not committed to retrofitting any existing aircraft with its new business class seat.
It is moronic to fail to understand that UA's percentage of aircraft with true suite business class seats will only increase when they retire and retrofit aircraft, no matter how fast the 787s come.
Thankfully, common sense shows that UA will be forced to retire aircraft because many of their aircraft will run out of time on the airframes.
Evidently everything needs to be spelled out for our resident analyst TD.
Of course UA and for that matter, a majority of airlines remain coy of committing to aircraft retirement given what Boeing has promised and in turn delivered over the last 5 years. Add to that Airbus's continued engine issues with CFM. Aircraft are not reaching customers on time. EVERYONE KNOWS THIS.
Thus, UA, who has a management team extremely conscious about the...
Evidently everything needs to be spelled out for our resident analyst TD.
Of course UA and for that matter, a majority of airlines remain coy of committing to aircraft retirement given what Boeing has promised and in turn delivered over the last 5 years. Add to that Airbus's continued engine issues with CFM. Aircraft are not reaching customers on time. EVERYONE KNOWS THIS.
Thus, UA, who has a management team extremely conscious about the stock price not over committing to anything that is out of their hands.
If it were DL, you'd be applauding such careful guidance. Especially given what we've seen with happened with Lufthansa and the 777X or Southwest and the 737MAX7.
You know all this. Instead you shift the conversation to Polaris isn't a suite because it doesn't have a door or DL has less business class seats, so it's a superior product.
Yup, you definitely won those two arguments...
"and the DL 767s are leaving the fleet with a possible 787 order accelerating the 767 exit while UA seems committed to growing its MAX TATL usage."
This is the most moronic comment. UA has 142 firm orders for 787s. Now who knows with Boeing but both stated that UA "should" be receiving 1-2 new 787s a month starting 2026.
Where are those planes going to be deployed Tim? LAX to Kansas City? IAH...
"and the DL 767s are leaving the fleet with a possible 787 order accelerating the 767 exit while UA seems committed to growing its MAX TATL usage."
This is the most moronic comment. UA has 142 firm orders for 787s. Now who knows with Boeing but both stated that UA "should" be receiving 1-2 new 787s a month starting 2026.
Where are those planes going to be deployed Tim? LAX to Kansas City? IAH to Portland? Or how about replace aging 767s throughout the network which a large majority of them are...TATL
What hat is Delta going to reach into to pull 59 replacements for aging 767s with no firm orders.
So keep talking aisle %...
Tim, Delta hasn’t even ordered their replacement for the 767s yet, they can’t retire them for years, weren’t they supposed to announce their 787 order this past weekend according to you?
I'd rank American Airlines Flagship First on the 773, DeltaOne Suites on their a359, a339, or 764, and jetBlue Mint on the new a321neo, above United Polaris lie-flat on their 757, 787, 767, or 777. However, yes, I'd prefer United Polaris and American's Flagship Business over Delta's older 763s.
I'd like to understand the perception issues. In coach, a A321XLR will give you more space than a 9-abreast 787 or 10-abreast 777 (the norm, unfortunately).
Apart from that, quicker boarding and deplaning, shorter bursts of people at overseas border patrols, there are only advantages to a smaller plane. Of course, it must be fit accordingly, you can't just repurpose a domestic plane (and call the domestic first premium economy).
Why people think less...
I'd like to understand the perception issues. In coach, a A321XLR will give you more space than a 9-abreast 787 or 10-abreast 777 (the norm, unfortunately).
Apart from that, quicker boarding and deplaning, shorter bursts of people at overseas border patrols, there are only advantages to a smaller plane. Of course, it must be fit accordingly, you can't just repurpose a domestic plane (and call the domestic first premium economy).
Why people think less of a brand when they see a smaller plane? Would they rather fly French Bee (A350) than La Compagnie (A321LR)?
I would just like to add that there are some commentors calling Polaris "suites", which is misleading. Suites have doors, and if you want to go toe-to-toe, UA has zero widebodies with suites, AA has just a few B789P, and DL has almost all their a339neos and a359s. So who's really in front here?
Nothing like a three foot door to provide privacy on an airliner. Sorry, but if you'd ever sat/slept in a Polaris Suite you would understand how silly that is, but worry not. UA is putting three foot doors on their new and enhanced Polaris Suites and Studios that start arriving this year. If only people weren't five or six feet tall. ;)
2 thoughts:
1. When OMAAT has an article about another A321XLR long haul a lot of comments talk about how uncomfortable it would be, but when this article comes up suddenly a bunch of people defend these long haul narrowbody flights. So what gives?
2. If you're reading this article, you are not an 'average' customer for any airline. When 'average' customers approach the gate and go "oh wow, that's a small plane", that does...
2 thoughts:
1. When OMAAT has an article about another A321XLR long haul a lot of comments talk about how uncomfortable it would be, but when this article comes up suddenly a bunch of people defend these long haul narrowbody flights. So what gives?
2. If you're reading this article, you are not an 'average' customer for any airline. When 'average' customers approach the gate and go "oh wow, that's a small plane", that does far more to their perception of the airline than the actual product. Similar to maintaining the inflight entertainment screens.
Totally agree.
I'm no fan of DL, as I've traditionally been an AA flyer, but I feel like I understand the point they are trying to make.
I barely tolerated the switch from the 762 to the A321T's on American for their trans on flights. Any flight time of 4 hours or longer, and I really would prefer not being on a narrowbody. You can put beautiful suites in the front like JetBlue Mint but If the...
I'm no fan of DL, as I've traditionally been an AA flyer, but I feel like I understand the point they are trying to make.
I barely tolerated the switch from the 762 to the A321T's on American for their trans on flights. Any flight time of 4 hours or longer, and I really would prefer not being on a narrowbody. You can put beautiful suites in the front like JetBlue Mint but If the rest of the cabin is stuffed to the gills with seats, that's not very luxury.
While accessing smaller market destinations with the A321XLR is a great thing, it's not something that I would end up doing. In the example Ben used, I would rather fly to MAD on a wide body and then use Spain's excellent high speed rail network to get to Asturias and Galicia. Ultimately, people have their preferences and I think DL has a point to their aversion to narrowbody TATL flights (the 757 to DUb not withstanding).
good points but DL does not fly narrowbodies to DUB or any other city further east of Iceland.
In fact, DL uses 763s from JFK to KEF but a domestic configured 757 from DTW (and sometimes MSP) to KEF (competitive with Icelandair's 738 which is essentially domestically configured)
DL uses widebodies to many cities that UA serves with 757s or 737s.
There is no planet on which any of UA's existing narrowbodies are superior...
good points but DL does not fly narrowbodies to DUB or any other city further east of Iceland.
In fact, DL uses 763s from JFK to KEF but a domestic configured 757 from DTW (and sometimes MSP) to KEF (competitive with Icelandair's 738 which is essentially domestically configured)
DL uses widebodies to many cities that UA serves with 757s or 737s.
There is no planet on which any of UA's existing narrowbodies are superior to DL 763s but only in the minds of UA fan brats that can't admit reality that UA is not at all focused on being a consistently premium airline or even premium services on all flights despite claiming that premium is where they get their profits.
When will DL exceed 50% of its wide-bodies having Delta One Suites?
DL has about 180 widebodies and 80 of them have Delta One Suites.
DL is retiring 7 767s this winter and taking delivery of at least 4 new A350s by next summer.
At the latest, DL will be at 50% of its widebodies with Delta One Suites by the summer of 2026
AA might be at 50% of its widebody fleet with suites by 2030.
UA won't reach that goal until the mid 2030s unless it retires a significant number of widebodies.
TD says "At the latest, DL will be at 50% of its widebodies with Delta One Suites by the summer of 2026"
And that's after nine years of installing them? Yikes!
UA has had 100% of its international wide-body aircraft with Polaris suites, Premium Plus and Economy Plus for years with far more high-J seating than DL.
Why does DL have so much trouble installing new interiors in a timely manner? You would...
TD says "At the latest, DL will be at 50% of its widebodies with Delta One Suites by the summer of 2026"
And that's after nine years of installing them? Yikes!
UA has had 100% of its international wide-body aircraft with Polaris suites, Premium Plus and Economy Plus for years with far more high-J seating than DL.
Why does DL have so much trouble installing new interiors in a timely manner? You would think with that crack Richard Anderson-initiated MRO operation they would be better at such things.
If it's a 5-10 hour flight, there's no reason any 'premium' carrier can't install lie-flat up-front, whether it's single-aisle or wide-body. Even Delta has had lie-flat (2-2) on its older 75S, sometimes used for trans-Atlantic, but mostly transcontinental flights. With the 737max and a321neo, already other carriers are using these aircraft across the Atlantic with premium cabins (B6, SAS, TAP, etc.) With the a321XLR, carriers could fly to smaller airports in Europe and to South...
If it's a 5-10 hour flight, there's no reason any 'premium' carrier can't install lie-flat up-front, whether it's single-aisle or wide-body. Even Delta has had lie-flat (2-2) on its older 75S, sometimes used for trans-Atlantic, but mostly transcontinental flights. With the 737max and a321neo, already other carriers are using these aircraft across the Atlantic with premium cabins (B6, SAS, TAP, etc.) With the a321XLR, carriers could fly to smaller airports in Europe and to South America. Recliners for a 6+ hour flight is not great. There should be greater comfort and consistency in that segment.
I would imagine that coach even on the 321XR would really suck. Three small lavs for a 7-8 hour flight?
Aer Lingus A321XLR coach: 18" width, 32" coach. American / United B789 coach: 17.1" width, 31" pitch.
How many lavs does one need?
The branding issues are real: this is about the ongoing "Spirit-ization" of airlines since the start of COVID, the increasing focus on down-market leisure. AA is basically indistinguishable from Spirit/Frontier at this point, and UA is not far off. And this is true on intl routes too: EWR-SCQ is clearly a leisure market, and even in premium cabins on formerly core business trunk routes you are as likely to see sweatpants and micro-dogs as you...
The branding issues are real: this is about the ongoing "Spirit-ization" of airlines since the start of COVID, the increasing focus on down-market leisure. AA is basically indistinguishable from Spirit/Frontier at this point, and UA is not far off. And this is true on intl routes too: EWR-SCQ is clearly a leisure market, and even in premium cabins on formerly core business trunk routes you are as likely to see sweatpants and micro-dogs as you are corporate-issued laptops. DL is clearly trying to put a stake in the ground and say "we are still a premium/business airline," which is a legitimate branding position to take. There is an increasing split between the crowd that will basically endure anything for a nonstop to their final destination and those that value the flying experience itself, or at least want it to be civilized. Most of the newly-minted leisure travelers are in the former camp; serving the latter can be a point of differentiation.
Chas says "The branding issues are real"
What effect does having only 77 of 178 wide-body aircraft with Delta One Suites on branding? Is Basic Economy on all flights part of the "ongoing Spirit-ization of airlines since the start of Covid"?
Chas says "AA is basically indistinguishable from Spirit/Frontier at this point"
AA is almost nothing like Spirit/Frontier, but feel free to tell us how you came to that conclusion.
in other words, you focus on the speck in someone else's eye because you cannot see the log in your own
When do you think DL will exceed 50% of its wide-bodies having Delta One Suites?
Ben,
One thing you didn't mention is how Delta's pilot scope fits in with this. Delta has to keep equivalent TATL flying with their JV partners but only widebodies count for that scope. There's little incentive to fly narrow bodies, for now. But as SAS likely joins the Delta JV, it seems likely Delta pilots will fix that oversight and want some type of equivalent flying (widebody or narrow body) to match the SAS A321LRs
UA’s still a bit sore over losing SAS to SkyTeam, eh? The one that got away… *sigh*
When paying with my own money, I would fly a 757 or A321 in domestic first-class seats (assuming there was sufficient legroom) if it was reasonably priced for short JFK-LHR flights than pay $5,000 for maybe 6 hours in lie-flat seats. You lose almost 2 hours because they serve 2 meals. If you're lucky, you get 4 hours of sleep.
FTN, meals are not obligatory, not at least on a World Class Airline. Telling the FA’s that one only be disturbed in an emergency, works a treat and ensures a restful night …. weather permitting …. :-)
Sure but it's difficult to sleep when with all the noise and all the lights on. Some of the airlines outrageously turn the lights on and start serving breakfast more than an hour before the scheduled landing time.
FNT, practice makes perfect.
PJ’s, Empty bladder, Eye shades, NC AirPods, Connected to iPhone or iPad featuring a playlist from Classic FM Calm. Get your head down and relax into the arms of Morpheus.
Works every time for me as the cabin activity is nothing compared to that of a war zone …. :-)
Personally, I think this is really just a negotiating tactic for Delta with respect to Airbus.
Delta's negotiating prowess and creativity to score planes on the cheap is well known.
They find themselves between a rock and a hard place with the a321xlr, as there's simply no competitor in the market. The best they can do is act like they don't want the plane's performance capabilities in the first place, and hope that eventually Airbus...
Personally, I think this is really just a negotiating tactic for Delta with respect to Airbus.
Delta's negotiating prowess and creativity to score planes on the cheap is well known.
They find themselves between a rock and a hard place with the a321xlr, as there's simply no competitor in the market. The best they can do is act like they don't want the plane's performance capabilities in the first place, and hope that eventually Airbus will eventually cut them a deal. It ain't the greatest position to be negotiating from, but it's the only card DL has to play. And obviously DL views these potential 321XLR routes as being of marginal overall benefit at any rate, otherwise they'd pay the going rate.
And there is some truth that your typical (clueless) passenger will be surprised to the downside to learn that they're flying on a single aisle plane when they were expecting a "big plane" based on the simple fact that it's a TATL route. But over the long term, DL is going to have to engage in more narrowbody TATL flying to compete.
Lars says "Delta's negotiating prowess and creativity to score planes on the cheap is well known. They find themselves between a rock and a hard place with the a321xlr, as there's simply no competitor in the market. The best they can do is act like they don't want the plane's performance capabilities in the first place, and hope that eventually Airbus will eventually cut them a deal. It ain't the greatest position to be negotiating...
Lars says "Delta's negotiating prowess and creativity to score planes on the cheap is well known. They find themselves between a rock and a hard place with the a321xlr, as there's simply no competitor in the market. The best they can do is act like they don't want the plane's performance capabilities in the first place, and hope that eventually Airbus will eventually cut them a deal. It ain't the greatest position to be negotiating from, but it's the only card DL has to play."
And that worked well before the post-Covid supply chain and Boeing issues. UA's massive orders in 2022 were either genius or extremely fortuitous. Advantage UA.
Unless Airbus can fix the range cut taken by the A321XLR in connection with the fuel tank fix, what's the point of Delta acquiring it for TATL missions? The plane won't be very helpful for unlocking expanded TATL flying from the Sunbelt, and that's where Delta would find the greatest potential upside.
This is very true HeathrowGuy. Those will work for UA and AA since they can fly out of the northeast, but ATL is just a little too far away on the east coast, and is clearly the focus for DL to go from ATL. We've seen it with the route reductions from JFK.
I see this as a way of DL making them seem like they are "doing the right thing" or providing superior service,...
This is very true HeathrowGuy. Those will work for UA and AA since they can fly out of the northeast, but ATL is just a little too far away on the east coast, and is clearly the focus for DL to go from ATL. We've seen it with the route reductions from JFK.
I see this as a way of DL making them seem like they are "doing the right thing" or providing superior service, when it's just about can you fly them TATL from a DL focus hub? The answer is no.
And the range of the XLR is barely better than a 757. We'll need more in the field to see how the range works out in practical applications.
Ben Schlappig, you are a naughty, naughty man! Almost as bad as I am at winding up the natives. One simply loves the spats between the rival brainwashed contestants …. very entertaining Ben, thank you …. :-)
Ben is a master at reader engagement and this story is a perfect example.
UA execs have been spouting off endlessly about how great they are relative to every other airline except for DL who they think they are just like.
DL has started swinging at UA to put it back in its place - not just w/ the LAX int'l expansion plus ORD but also at comments like this that show that UA is...
Ben is a master at reader engagement and this story is a perfect example.
UA execs have been spouting off endlessly about how great they are relative to every other airline except for DL who they think they are just like.
DL has started swinging at UA to put it back in its place - not just w/ the LAX int'l expansion plus ORD but also at comments like this that show that UA is not really focused at being premium.
It is also clear that there are a segment of UA fan nuts that cannot admit reality and hypocritically twist and manipulate to avoid admitting that
1. UA's international longhaul fleet is far from consistent including w/ its 757s.
2. UA is adding even more low-class mass transportation with its MAXs which like the 757 do not even have a true premium economy product comparable to UA's widebodies. UA's 757s are inferior in every cabin to DL's 763s.
3. AA and DL use international widebodies to Hawaii while UA uses its high density 777s which are just 2 A320s or 738s joined at the hip.
It is one thing to be loyal to a brand but it is quite another to have the Tulip shoved so far up your backside that you can't even see the truth let alone admit it.
Thank you Tim, I did enjoy your synopsis, especially the mental picture of the usual bunch of trolls attempting to remove tulips from their rear orifice …. :-)
Tim and his British alter ego jerking themselves off.
This is better than HBO.
So Eskimo …. you enjoyed reading Tim’s last paragraph above so much that the thought of the tulip being inserted into your posterior orifice has over excited you.
What will your family think of you now, bro? Adding sexual deviant to your multifaceted persona, hardly endearing darlink.
Furthermore, it is apparent that your trolling of contributors to this website has little to do with aviation and has become a sexual deviants conduit to...
So Eskimo …. you enjoyed reading Tim’s last paragraph above so much that the thought of the tulip being inserted into your posterior orifice has over excited you.
What will your family think of you now, bro? Adding sexual deviant to your multifaceted persona, hardly endearing darlink.
Furthermore, it is apparent that your trolling of contributors to this website has little to do with aviation and has become a sexual deviants conduit to self gratification. You and your multiple imaginary login partners loose credibility by the hour. Poor, pathetic creature.
Thanks for the grin once again …. :-)
Nice to see you, Tim. I enjoy when folks get 'meta' on here. Comparing the various blogs, I'd say, the main difference between Ben, Gary, Matthew, etc. is that Ben and Matthew's sites actually allow replying to comments, whereas, Garys are chronological, without that ability. One thing is constant: You're on all of them, and that makes them better. Keep Climbing! 100 more years!
Without talking about their 767s, here’s the thing, United can get away with flying the 737 and 757 to Europe because they’re able to provide a full long haul service in economy and premium economy. (1 main hot meal with 3 options and an arrival hot snack) since their entire mainline fleet is equipped with enough ovens in the back. Meanwhile delta’s 757 routes to KEF (even the long ones) only get a cold sandwich...
Without talking about their 767s, here’s the thing, United can get away with flying the 737 and 757 to Europe because they’re able to provide a full long haul service in economy and premium economy. (1 main hot meal with 3 options and an arrival hot snack) since their entire mainline fleet is equipped with enough ovens in the back. Meanwhile delta’s 757 routes to KEF (even the long ones) only get a cold sandwich and that’s it due to their lack of ovens.
Yes a 737 isn’t a pleasant ride for that long, but you’re still getting the same service you’d be getting on a wide body on United at least, if anything one of the best UA meals I’ve had was flying out of greenland
LMFAO Delta's 767s are way worse than any of the narrow body products with proper J class currently being flown.
I think this calls for an article where you compare the various transatlantic options and rate and compare them based on your experience! I wouldn't stop at the American carriers but include AF, KLM, BA (maybe split LHR/LGW as that's an almost perfect CS vs older seats split), Virgin, SAS and LH group all at once.
My parents are the opposite of me; know little to nothing regarding aircraft and hard product differentiation.
I booked them JFK-AMS in Mint this past summer, and they loved it. That said, they both commented on "why were we on a Frontier-sized plane to go all the way to Amsterdam? We would never fly this in coach to Europe"
I also flew Mint to Europe and thought the product was good. However, if the price difference is not too large I would choose a wide body flight with more extensive meal service.
JetBlue Mint meal on TATL is superior to most meals in Business Class on any of the ‘big three’ US carriers.
Ben clearly needs the at least once a week Delta vs. United bashfest so he copies the exact same, tired arguments that the UA fan kids use.
No, Ben, it isn't a DL vs. UA thing. first, AA is also ordering the XLR. Second, AA and UA are unique among large global airlines in using the XLRs
Second, there is a big difference between Iceland - which has LONG had narrowbody service to N. America...
Ben clearly needs the at least once a week Delta vs. United bashfest so he copies the exact same, tired arguments that the UA fan kids use.
No, Ben, it isn't a DL vs. UA thing. first, AA is also ordering the XLR. Second, AA and UA are unique among large global airlines in using the XLRs
Second, there is a big difference between Iceland - which has LONG had narrowbody service to N. America and continental Europe which AA and UA intend to serve with XLRs while UA currently serves Ireland, the UK and continental Europe with narrowbodies that are nowhere comparable to UA's widebody levels of service.
and finally, it is actually very accurate to note the brand confusion that UA ALONE creates by offering service to CONTINENTAL Europe on domestic configured aircraft. and the justification that it will be nonstop for somebody is about as accurate as arguing that using a 50 seat RJ on 1000 flight is ok because someone will be able to fly nonstop. Tell us the percentage of passengers on UA's flights to Nuuk and the islands of Portugal that originate their travels in New York (actually NJ) and I can assure you that the percentage is well south of a majority.
Given how much UA loves to talk about how close they are to DL, it is opportunities like this where the evidence is clear and DL gets to take a well-earned swipe at UA given how much UA execs love to take a swipe at UA.
UA has no brand consistency in its TATL fleet NOW, is making it worse by adding MAXs to its TATL schedule, and there is nothing premium about a MAX over the Atlantic and that will be apparent in UA's financial results which will fall short of DL's - even though the UA yappers will tell us they fly more ASMs than DL.
Oh, and DL's entrance into move multiple LAX TPAC markets has resulted in UA's exit and DL is not through growing UA at UA's expense, just as was true in LAX domestic at AA's expense.
A lot of cover your ass by Tim, when Delta screwed up and didn't order XLR.
again, if the XLR was so great, why haven't BA, AF, KL, VS, and all of the LH Group airlines ordered it?
It speaks volumes that AA and UA among the largest global airlines are the two that HAVE ordered the XLR or even the LR (B6 doesn't even have XLRs in service)
and while product is part of the reason for DL's decision, costs for narrowbody TATL ops are too high at US carrier labor costs which are some of the highest in the world.
The large international carriers haven't ordered the A321XLR for the same reason they ordered the A380: they generally have one (or two, for LH) megahubs to route their international customers through.
The US3 have multiple hubs to route customers through, so no one hub will see all of their international connections.
you realize you don't actually have to take the bait and write a dissertation on this topic every time it comes up?
Good to see you, Max. It wouldn’t be the same without, Tim. I’m sorry it took me so long to venture from VFTW to here and elsewhere. I didn’t realize the party was over here the whole time.
TD says "UA has no brand consistency in its TATL fleet NOW"
UA: 206 Int'l wide-bodies ALL with Polaris suites, Premium Plus & Economy Plus
DL: 178 Int'l wide-bodies: 77 have D1 suites
That dog don't hunt.
and you, rebel, aren't smart enough to admit that UA's 757s have no brand consistency to their widebodies and the MAXs certainly don't.
IOW, UA is only brand consistent if you exclude the types that fly as many flights as DL's 763s.
Your dog is comatose on the front porch
and you, max, prove you are incapable of discussing the facts of the topic - which I, once again, accurately note - so you...
and you, rebel, aren't smart enough to admit that UA's 757s have no brand consistency to their widebodies and the MAXs certainly don't.
IOW, UA is only brand consistent if you exclude the types that fly as many flights as DL's 763s.
Your dog is comatose on the front porch
and you, max, prove you are incapable of discussing the facts of the topic - which I, once again, accurately note - so you resort in your first post on this article to discussing me.
DL's statement IS correct. UA has no brand consistency. AA at least retired the 767s and is waiting for the XLR to venture back across the Atlantic w/ narrowbodies.
Here's a OMAAT blast from the past that demonstrates a gross lack of DL int'l brand consistency within its wide-body fleet's hard product.
https://onemileatatime.com/guides/delta-one-business-class-suites/
UA does an amazing job of matching the product to the market especially when developing new markets. CAL developed these long-thin Western European markets from EWR and UA obviously sees the value on continuing to serve these markets eventually with a great narrow-body product, A321-XLRs.
UA's entire wide-body fleet (206 aircraft)...
Here's a OMAAT blast from the past that demonstrates a gross lack of DL int'l brand consistency within its wide-body fleet's hard product.
https://onemileatatime.com/guides/delta-one-business-class-suites/
UA does an amazing job of matching the product to the market especially when developing new markets. CAL developed these long-thin Western European markets from EWR and UA obviously sees the value on continuing to serve these markets eventually with a great narrow-body product, A321-XLRs.
UA's entire wide-body fleet (206 aircraft) has had Polaris suites, PP & EP seats for years. Why is DL so far behind after so long in this regard? Pretty astounding considering DL is so well managed in other areas.
no. You're just an idiot and while you seem to have time to rewrite the same drivel 1000x per week, I don't feel the need to remind you of obvious things you just omit and mischaracterize
but in short.
1. Do I want to take a MAX8 to Galicia? No, but it's economy and premium economy. Anyone that purchases premium economy won't be too surprised when they hop on a max8. Like I've...
no. You're just an idiot and while you seem to have time to rewrite the same drivel 1000x per week, I don't feel the need to remind you of obvious things you just omit and mischaracterize
but in short.
1. Do I want to take a MAX8 to Galicia? No, but it's economy and premium economy. Anyone that purchases premium economy won't be too surprised when they hop on a max8. Like I've said ad nauseam. domestic first is quite literally the same seat as most premium economy seats. Just doesn't have the foot rest (that I've never used in W anyway...)
2. UA has much more brand consistency in J TATL vs Delta. The 757s are different, sure. but You're busy defending Delta when they've been flying around those crap LATAM A350s with no aisle access either or wifi, to say nothing of the 767s.
Just chill out, dude. Do you even realize how stupid you sound when you spend your entire day responding to articles?
Dog don’t hunt - Hysterical! Although UA did announce 2 of the 4 2026 summer destinations will be served by 737-8MAX.
While UA may have more WB with Polaris - I find myself avoiding the 777-HD and the MAX west coast flights to Hawaii. I backtrack to ORD to get on the 787-10s.
AA/DL both fly their premium cabin airplanes in the Hawaii market.
I’m in Houston - just dying for HA/AS to serve ANY of the islands non-stop from IAH.
M. Casey says "AA/DL both fly their premium cabin airplanes in the Hawaii market."
Which great for customers, but a gross mismatch of limited premium resources to a leisure market. Then again, I am not sure a DL 767 can be considered 'premium'.
I mean idk what you’re taking about, the meal service level is the same on the max as a 777 on United. I do agree the legroom is the only issue here. But compare this to delta, delta’s Iceland flights get a cold sandwich in economy and that’s it, while UA’s greenland flight (also shorter) get a full hot meal with 3 options in economy, and an arrival hot snack. I love the max but...
I mean idk what you’re taking about, the meal service level is the same on the max as a 777 on United. I do agree the legroom is the only issue here. But compare this to delta, delta’s Iceland flights get a cold sandwich in economy and that’s it, while UA’s greenland flight (also shorter) get a full hot meal with 3 options in economy, and an arrival hot snack. I love the max but pushing it that long is too much I’ll agree, the experience in economy is very close to comparable to what United currently has. As all of UA’s mainline fleet is in theory capable of doing a long haul service (except the Neo but that one they went way too overboard with how much they could stuff on it).
Speaking of fleet Tim, where is that 787 announcement you promised? Or are you ready to admit that you know a lot less about this industry than you say?
Also the reason Delta doesn’t want to fly narrowbodies across the Atlantic is a case of geography. Its JV hubs are CDG and AMS, flying XLRs will start to compete and shrink usage of its JV hubs. So it doesn’t want to fly to secondary cities...
Speaking of fleet Tim, where is that 787 announcement you promised? Or are you ready to admit that you know a lot less about this industry than you say?
Also the reason Delta doesn’t want to fly narrowbodies across the Atlantic is a case of geography. Its JV hubs are CDG and AMS, flying XLRs will start to compete and shrink usage of its JV hubs. So it doesn’t want to fly to secondary cities in Western Europe (unless there is enough demand to really warrant a direct widebody). Not that I think people wanting to go to Glasgow really want to connect in AMS but that’s the only way to get there now on the Delta JV - just as an example. United on the other hand has JV hubs in FRA, MUC, ZRH and soon FCO - therefore it can fly to secondary destinations all throughout Western Europe that would have been illogical to connect through its hubs, but it now outcompetes the Delta indirect options on. It is a weird stake to have in the ground from Delta, essentially knocking them out of plenty of markets that are too small for wide bodies for the sake of “brand and product consistency” - when they literally don’t have that now.
UX which is part of Skyteam flies daily to SCQ
They only go to VGO.
I rather not fly any US airline across the Atlantic.
Then, please don’t. Better to take EU-based carriers, because if they significantly delay or are cancelled due to something under their control, then those EU-carriers on the US-EU route would compensate you in accordance with EU261, whereas, US carriers are only liable on the EU-US routes.
I mean he makes an extremely valid point… Not forcing customers to transit through Atlanta so they can fill wide bodies would be extremely ‘off brand’ for what we have come to expect from Delta.
As passenger levels increase, there's a fundamental operational challenge: primary hubs have only so many slots and can provide for only so many connecting passengers. At a point, airlines need to look to non-stop flights to secondary/tertiary airports. But, is there enough demand going to those airports for an all wide-body strategy to work financially?
In the 90s, Boeing's CEO expressly acknowledged the issue and said it would focus on point-to-point. While Airbus was focused on mega-hubs and the A380. Boeing would have a substantial advantage over Airbus. But, at the time, the customers didn't follow and Boeing missed its chance at an XLR-type offering. Now, seemingly, the positions are flipped and Boeing is playing catch-up.
the 767 opened secondary routes across the Atlantic and was heavily bought by US airlines. The 777 did the same across the Pacific.
US airlines now are in the position of upgauging to larger routes or to use smaller aircraft with poor per-seat metrics across the Atlantic.
the majority of global airlines are not adding narrowbody TATL flights; AA and UA are the exception. Airlines at Ireland and Iceland have long used narrowbodies to reach...
the 767 opened secondary routes across the Atlantic and was heavily bought by US airlines. The 777 did the same across the Pacific.
US airlines now are in the position of upgauging to larger routes or to use smaller aircraft with poor per-seat metrics across the Atlantic.
the majority of global airlines are not adding narrowbody TATL flights; AA and UA are the exception. Airlines at Ireland and Iceland have long used narrowbodies to reach the US.
DL is upgauging and will replace 763s with 764s and 332s and, for at least the next 10 years, be upgauging its TATL flights rather than using narrowbodies.
Maybe in 10 years, Airbus or Boeing will produce a 763 sized aircraft that will change economics but that is nowhere to be seen on the horizon.
TD says "the majority of global airlines are not adding narrowbody TATL flights"
Because, other than maybe BA, no other airlines have a connecting hub within range of feasible destinations like EWR that lends itself so well to such flights. Advantage UA.
It's just a matter of time.
One has to wonder if political pressure is being applied to DL and others to resist buying Airbus aircraft? Certainly the latest buzz from the right side of the pond is speculating upon such a scenario.
The CEOs of the three primary US-based legacy carriers have taken positions and made statements that are acquiescing to the current administration. But, administrations change.
We hope
…. and I thought that Mr Trump, was the ‘bees knees’ according to the world press corps today. After all he has achieved in weeks what his predecessor failed to do in almost two years. Perhaps the IDF and the Israeli government helped a little too with the end of Hamas/Israeli hostilities?
I still like to know why delta got rid of the 777s every airline in the world uses those aircraft' I just never understood it
Fuel efficiency and life cycle costs. The 777 is a late-1980s design. Subsequently, the 787 and various Airbus models made huge advances. In 2011, Boeing knew an updated 777 was needed. And, had delivery of the 777X actually started in 2017, when originally projected, airline fleets would likely be different today. But, as it stands, deliveries start in 2027.
DL seems to want to cut off their nose to spite their face. I will take Some Service to new markets over No Service.
DL can also soon say Bye Bye to their margins too with their smaller route network and retreating from key routes, tail between legs.
as usual, UA devotee, actual facts, not your personal bias argue against what you believe to be the case.
DL has long had higher margins than UA and that will continue to be the case.
UA can't argue that they are trying to be a premium airline and then add service on a plane that doesn't even have a competitive premium economy product, let alone not even their supposedly vaunted Polaris product that isn't...
as usual, UA devotee, actual facts, not your personal bias argue against what you believe to be the case.
DL has long had higher margins than UA and that will continue to be the case.
UA can't argue that they are trying to be a premium airline and then add service on a plane that doesn't even have a competitive premium economy product, let alone not even their supposedly vaunted Polaris product that isn't even direct aisle access in business class and only 1/3 get aisle seats in coach.
Either UA is engaged in double speak or they aren't really focused on being premium which is what UA and DL say are generating their margins.
The reality is that A and B are both correct.
UA is focused on size and they are willing to cheapen their product in order to be able to tout their size.
If you care about your brand, you don't sell a product that is below your brand standards no matter how many more people it attracts.
TD say, "If you care about your brand, you don't sell a product that is below your brand standards no matter how many more people it attracts."
See Basic Economy, possibly DL's greatest competitive innovation.
It's just a matter of time.
In the past delta flew 757s from jfk-Edi jfk-dub they were good going over coming back with heavy head winds diversions to Bangor or gander to gas and go or sometimes even Boston they couldn't make it back to jfk without stopping for fuel
Stockholm too.
Except Delta has until quite recently flown 757s with domestic first-class seats marketed as premium economy to Iceland and Ireland. I believe they were also using these for London-Gatwick. Weren't they also using the 757 with Delta One 2x2 seating for Raleigh to Paris?
You are correct. RDU-CDG was a 752 cycled in from ATL
He really thinks the ghetto 767-300 Premium Economy Plus business class is "best in class across the Atlantic"? Is this guy T*m D*nn?
Yes, his intelligence level seems to be around mine, where I think replacing the e at the end of my name with an a makes me a different person.
Eat me, Julia.
I’m enjoying this Julia-on-Julia action!
Delta's TATL network is significant, and very large (though I believe UA has passed DL as the #1 US carrier across the Atlantic, not that this metric means much or should be relevant, because frankly, it's not). Delta still relies on aged 767-300ERs and aging 767-400ERs for a number of TATL routes. These planes have subpar products, from nose to tail. In fact, DL's premium products, specifically Delta One, is so disparate across the fleet...
Delta's TATL network is significant, and very large (though I believe UA has passed DL as the #1 US carrier across the Atlantic, not that this metric means much or should be relevant, because frankly, it's not). Delta still relies on aged 767-300ERs and aging 767-400ERs for a number of TATL routes. These planes have subpar products, from nose to tail. In fact, DL's premium products, specifically Delta One, is so disparate across the fleet (only the A339 and A359 actually have the best and latest), that Delta must compensate for this with the ground experience and the hubris it creates. It's not a premium airline. No US carrier is. America doesn't have a service culture of that kind. It's not in its DNA. Delta's premium push makes sense of course from a marketing spin and differentiation tactic, though having just flown two roundtrips on Delta to Europe in the last month, while it all looks like it should be good, I've found the flight attendants badly groomed, unpleasant, and the food and service disgusting and mediocre. Delta relies very much on US POS to fill its planes to Europe and when the US economy tanks (and it will), Delta will be left on the sidelines without narrow body jets to run some flights to markets where frankly, the 339 is too large.
DL flies more WIDEBODY capacity to Europe than any other airline. UA's capacity advantage on TATL is because of their use of narrowbodies and their service to India and DXB.
and just stop w/ the nonsense about the inconsistency of the DL fleet; even Ben notes that UA's 757s have the worst business class product among US carriers. DL's 767-300ERs have direct aisle lie flat in business class; UA's 757s do not and UA's MAXs...
DL flies more WIDEBODY capacity to Europe than any other airline. UA's capacity advantage on TATL is because of their use of narrowbodies and their service to India and DXB.
and just stop w/ the nonsense about the inconsistency of the DL fleet; even Ben notes that UA's 757s have the worst business class product among US carriers. DL's 767-300ERs have direct aisle lie flat in business class; UA's 757s do not and UA's MAXs do not even have a true premium economy product.
and EVERY widebody in the DL fleet has a much higher percentage of aisle seats than any current narrowbody. Product is not just about business class; 2/3 of coach passengers can't stand up on a 737 or 320 family aircraft w/o asking someone
don't forget that DL is retiring 767-300ERs at a pretty rapid pace and has not flown the 757 to Ireland or beyond for years. AA is in the same boat. Life consists of now and the future, not the past. DL's comparisons are valid.
and you can talk about your anecdotal experiences all you want but DL does manage to put the ingredients together in its total service package better than any US airline - BASED ON THE BOTTOM LINE. DL can certainly offer offer an even higher quality product but they still generate the most revenue and profit.
as earnings season rolls out, it will be clear that DL has accomplished what its competitors can only wish they had.
Delta must be paying you to be this much of a fool.
LadyO, has it never occurred to you that you would be best advised to look in the mirror, if you wish to see a fool, yes?
Delta will likely be the launch customer of Boeing's newer narrowbody jet and you can be sure that from a cabin width and length point of view, one size variant will be designed to work for DL as a TATL/transcon product.
The 321XLR is just too new and the A32x assembly lines are too full for DL to be able to find reasonably priced frames. If they have to wait 10 years anyway, why...
Delta will likely be the launch customer of Boeing's newer narrowbody jet and you can be sure that from a cabin width and length point of view, one size variant will be designed to work for DL as a TATL/transcon product.
The 321XLR is just too new and the A32x assembly lines are too full for DL to be able to find reasonably priced frames. If they have to wait 10 years anyway, why buy into a product that's old already ? They might as well put their focus on the the newer one that will have higher cabin pressure and moisture, better fuel economy, possibly sl. larger cabin width, higher capacity with maintained turnaround times, freight etc.
Delta either buys strategic or opportunistic. The A321XLR is not a strategic buy and there's no cheap opportunities. So they have to do windows dressing until they have something more interesting to say.
One could agree with that assessment… except with Boeing you’re rolling the dice that waiting 10 years won’t turn into 20 or even longer and Delta’s fleet cannot survive that long.
A number of airlines hung themselves out to dry committing to expansion and fleet renewal based on a 777x. There will be no more ‘cheap acquisition opportunities’ for the foreseeable future baring a major recession (already predicted to have less effect on air...
One could agree with that assessment… except with Boeing you’re rolling the dice that waiting 10 years won’t turn into 20 or even longer and Delta’s fleet cannot survive that long.
A number of airlines hung themselves out to dry committing to expansion and fleet renewal based on a 777x. There will be no more ‘cheap acquisition opportunities’ for the foreseeable future baring a major recession (already predicted to have less effect on air travel than previous), a massive terrorist attack or China managing to produce a commercially viable Airplane. You can no longer count on a cyclical downturn or major bankruptcy creating a glut of cheap planes.
Or the next pandemic where you won’t be allowed to be vaccinated.
Delta seems to spout more disingenuous BS than other airlines. They're fine flying their mediocre 767 product right now...
You sound like Immorten Joe… “medicore!”
What will Delta use when the 767-300s have to be retired, or will they leave all the leisure markets that could support only that smaller plane’s capacity?
Time will tell if the Delta long term narrow body plan will work out for them …. I’m sure that Tim will put his spin on the situation quite soon.
Truly don’t understand why Delta didn’t bug the 321xlr.
How are they going to run flights they operate now once the 767-300 goes away? For example, JFK to Porto, JFK to Catania and JFK to Shannon.
the 764 which will be around for five years after the 763 or the 332 which probably still has another decade left in it
Being able to fly point to point nonstop is such a huge win in favour of the XLR. Who in their right mind wants to transfer in FRA or LHR when they can hop straight to Ibiza or Olbia? Widebodies are generally more comfortable but getting to your holiday in 8 hours vs 11 or 12 is a major benefit of the XLR.
A very valid argument there JK, let us see if the naysayers try to shoot you down …. :-)
I strongly agree with you, JK - provided that the XLR has a decent onboard product. Flying 8 hours in a standard recliner on a daytime flight might be ok. For an overnight flight, I definitely prefer a widebody plan with a proper business class cabin.
I do know people who would pay a significant premium to fly nonstop. Personally, I have my preferences as far as airplanes and seat configurations go; there are times I would do the opposite. If flying coach, no question I would prefer a 767 or 330 to a 321. Even at the expense of a few extra hours, transit, and higher costs. 777 (10 abreast) or 787 (9 abreast) I avoid completely except in PE or above.