Delta and the DC-9s

[BoilerUP]

I'll take old avionics and a big paycheck any day over something shiny that pays peanuts.

You must love the Excel (and that autopilot) then!

 

[pilotyip]

9's forever

According to what is published, the 195 beats the 9 in range by almost 600nm, so I don't know what NWA mgmnt was looking at???

What they are looking at is there is no carrying cost because it is paid for, you can park it and it doesn't cost you anything. Unlike an airplane where you have a payment of $150K/mo that you have to fly it 14 hours every day. Besides the 9 will do 900 miles any day; probably could covers 75% of the flying out of DTW. Our experience with the 9 is it has high dispatch reliability. BTW it was still fun to fly an airplane where cables connect you to the flight controls.

 

[ACL65PILOT]

Tomcat:

The issue with the 175/190/ is that they have "range" but what DAL would use the jet on (300-700 sm), it is not efficient. The nine being paid for really is a tough nut to crack.

The have looked at the CS-100/300 and the 195/195X. Out of the ones that are official on the drawing board they actually lean more towards the 195. The Achilles heal of the 195 is its overall dispatch reliability rate. That kills an airplane more than anything.

They are still studying the CS models and the 195 195X but the preferred choice would be for the "Big Two" to clean sheet design a 110-150 seat jet. The 73X will be the 124-170 seat replacement. Pressure is being exerted, and it is evident by Embraer's talk of a clean sheet 195X. The manufactures know they need to up their game. Boeing and Airbus' issue is that they want to wait to design a narrow body jet when the technology of the 787 matriculates to a point where it meets the 25% efficiency percentile over current models. As they have both reported this is about 10 years away for design and 15 years away for production.
This leaves airlines like DAL that bought the last variants of the MD-80 series in the middle. The jets can run decent for another 8-10 years, but after that the gap in the production window makes operating the 80 series very expensive. The wait and see approach is being done for many reasons.
1) They really do not like what they see and do not want to commit billions to a fleet that will be obsolete in less than 15 years.

2) Waiting until 2015 to start the fleet renewal process means that they in effect need to replace the entire fleet. This will put a huge strain on our CAPEX and debt service. Because of this many fear that they will finally feel there is legitimate reason to make the pilots sell the 100~ seat flying as they need to get that liability off of their books to focus on the bigger jets.

With these two issues combined, it is going to get sporty in the next few years. We as pilots need to realize that it is coming and prepare accordingly. If the CS was just a little better, or the other manufacturers produced something a hair better this probably not be as big of an issue.

 

[OzBushWhacker]

I'll take old avionics and a big paycheck any day over something shiny that pays peanuts.

AMEN!

BTW it was still fun to fly an airplane where cables connect you to the flight controls.

AMEN AGAIN!!!! I'd give my left nut to fly a DC-9. Pity when hiring cranks up i'm probably only going to be able to get a job on a plastic fantastic.

BUT hopefully when the last E-170 is parked the crew ride home on a DC-9

 

[NuGuy]

Yup. With the -9, you don't even need a APU or huffer cart. Just roll it downhill and let the clutch out.

Nu

 

[Tomct]

DC-9....VW Bug of the skies....I like that.

Pop the clutch...that is funny NU.

I see what you are saying ACL, I guess only time will tell.

 

[ACL65PILOT]

If I recall you are flying an airbus aren't you Tomct?

 

[Tomct]

ACL, I could tell you, but then I would have to kill you. :laugh:

 

[ACL65PILOT]

I know the answer.

 

[aewanabe]

Then I guess Boeing is wrong??? http://www.boeing.com/commercial/dc-9/specs.html

Here are the E-195 specs. http://www.embraercommercialjets.com/#/en/products_detail/4

According to what is published, the 195 beats the 9 in range by almost 600nm, so I don't know what NWA mgmnt was looking at???

Redtail, when the 190's first came online at JB, they WERE a nightmare. But now that they have learned all of the fixes, I am told by a friend who flies them at Blue, that they are very reliable. But hey, if you want to continue doing a "T-Scan" and blowing black smoke...by all means, keep flying those dinosaurs. HAVE FUN! uke:

Ed, the more I think about it, I am sure that they will continue flying that thing until the wings fall off. I guess that is why NWA had the oldest fleet in the entire world, but at what point does burning a TON of gas/maintenance start cutting into a new "Fuel sipping" bird?

Just going by what is published.

You know, I fly the 190 and would much rather fly a -9. I like old airplanes, smoke, round dials and VORs. The 190 is a decent plane and is versatile in the missions, but despite tons of improvement we still struggle with dispatch reliability 5 years into the program.