Hiring one good pilot for ExpressOne

[Coolhans]

You're not gonna get 10 727-200 for 10 mil in flying condition with engines!

A decent 727-200 airframe in need of a C check will run you 500-700,000; without engines.
JT8Ds (-7s,9s, maybe 15s) go for about 350-450,000, depending on limiters.

Good Luck.

 

[slowto250]

You're right, EOI may never fly the 727 again, but if the investors take a look at all the costs involved, who knows, they may change their minds. I agree with you that the 727's are indeed cheap, but that's the beauty of them. Just think, "company X" can obtain a fleet of 727's for dirt cheap. The millions upon millions of dollars they save by purchasing 727's as opposed to buying a newer jet aircraft will offset the fuel and maintenance costs. Besides, mechanics that I know are always saying that 727 parts are alot easier to find than Airbus parts. I'm only guessing here, but how much is a used B767? I've seen some for 7-8 million. You can buy 10 727's (probably with the cargo door conversions already cut in them) for about 3.5 million (give or take). At 8 million for one 767, just 5 of them will cost 40 million (probably alot more just to get them cargo ready). For the difference in money you're saving by using the 727, you can operate a long time and still pull in a profit. Just look at all of the supplimentals using 727's still (Kittyhawk, express.net, TMA, Capital, Custom Air, Champion...even Fedex still flies them) They are cheap, I've heard that the engines are worth more than the airframes themselves.

It ain't the initial purchase price that makes operating the beloved 3 holer cost prohibitive. With the price of fuel (think 9-10 thousand lbs./first hour), DOC's make the upfront costs of newer, more expensive, and more efficient fanjets much easier to swallow.

 

[Midnight Flyer]

It ain't the initial purchase price that makes operating the beloved 3 holer cost prohibitive. With the price of fuel (think 9-10 thousand lbs./first hour), DOC's make the upfront costs of newer, more expensive, and more efficient fanjets much easier to swallow.

Yeah, I see what you're saying, but Im posing the question that why are so many supplimentals still flying the 727 (including fed ex/ups and DHL) They can easily slide over to an all modern fleet and retire the 72, but they're keeping their 727's.

 

[Jeff Helgeson]

Because tyhey already operate them and...

Yeah, I see what you're saying, but Im posing the question that why are so many supplimentals still flying the 727 (including fed ex/ups and DHL) They can easily slide over to an all modern fleet and retire the 72, but they're keeping their 727's.

...they don't fly them as many hours in their operation. Take a FEDEX B727 run:

MEM SDF MEM, MEM AUS MEM, etc.

3 -5 hours a night times 5 nights a week is not that much flying, fuel burning, etc. Plus there is a lot of sit time for the bird for additional MX. If you already have the equipment and it's paid for, the freight economics/mission allow the companies to keep operating the B727 for the shorter distances. The same goes for the DC8 and DC9.

If a company were to pull A/Cs out of the desert, it would make more sense to go with the DC9 freighter, less MX and 1/3 less fuel and pilots than the B727.

But hey, if you have the money to burn let's dust of the 72s and get them flying again!

 

[Midnight Flyer]

But hey, if you have the money to burn let's dust of the 72s and get them flying again!

Heck yeah, that's what I'm talking about.

 

[Jeff Helgeson]

I don't like management, but....

Heck yeah, that's what I'm talking about.

....pilots don't make the best financial decisions when it comes to running an airline.

PS: Check essential!

 

[flyinloki]

I think the guy that was talkin bout C checks and all that is correct. Those 727s sitting in the boneyard right now would cost a crap load of money to get back up and operating. From what I know they have the largest engine that a 72 can have on em. Not sure what that is maybe a -9 or something. But they've been sittin there a while. Think it would be more cost efficient to get an aircraft that is already current and does not need a whole lot of modification. Sure there are plenty out there.

 

[Midnight Flyer]

Those 727s sitting in the boneyard right now would cost a crap load of money to get back up and operating. From what I know they have the largest engine that a 72 can have on em. Not sure what that is maybe a -9 or something. But they've been sittin there a while. Think it would be more cost efficient to get an aircraft that is already current and does not need a whole lot of modification. Sure there are plenty out there.

The -9 rated engines are the less desirable. Going into Denver or PHX in the summer, you're going to want -15's or -17's. I've heard people say that a -15 or -17 with desent time left on them are worth more than the actual 727 airframe they're bolted onto.

When I flew in the postal system with EOI, we used the -9 on most of those runs, and the 15's/17's for the remainder of our other cargo and adhoc runs.

 

[flyinloki]

Ah I see. Definetly the engines are worth more Routes are starting on monday in the Chiefs. They are actually lookin at gettin a King Air C90 or 200 for some passenger runs as well as the first saab that is supposed to be delivered and converted to cargo on May 1. 1 a month up to august. So possibly 4 340s on property by Aug 2nd.

 

[SlapShot]

If I remember correctly, most of EOI's Postal birds were -7s. With the exception of 275 which had -15 for getting in and out of SLC.

Most of the ad-hoc airplanes had 15s. 721 and 742 were the only ones we had with -17s.

I can not believe the same certificate that used to fly in Europe and spent a short time in the south Pacific is now hoping to fly some Saabs for UPS. My how time has changed. I bet JW is laughing his a$$ off at KG.