New engines on MD-80's?

[fam62c]

I've always wondered about this and maybe someone has an answer. With all the MD-80's (and some DC-9's) out there why has nobody developed a program to re-engine the airplanes? It seems like you could put the latest generation hi-bypass fans on an MD-80 and get large fuel savings, range increases, performance increases and much lower noise and emission levels. This wouldn't be cheap but it seems like it would cost less than new airplanes and these birds could be flown well into the future with much lower operating costs. Obviously the MD-90 and 717 didn't sell too well but there were more efficient new designs available when choosing brand new airplanes. Would things work better if airlines were updating large fleets of planes that they already had? As fuel gets more and more expensive it seems that this would be viable. I think the only other possibility is that these planes will have to get parked or replaced at some point but there's a lot of them out there and I don't see how the airlines can afford to replace them all anytime soon.

 

[The_Russian]

I was wondering the same thing, especially for the 727 we fly.

Recently, I was told about a program sponsored by Fed-Ex to eliminate the #2 engine in the 727 and replace #'s 1 & 3 with high bypass turbofans. Eventually the program was dumped by Fed-Ex and no one picked it up. The company doing the conversion went out of business.

Someone refresh my memory.

Just another thought:

Airline management clearly has an inability to think long term, this is why nothing has been done.

 

[fly4surf]

I think this has been looked at and found to be to expensive.
Basically converting and old airframe MD-80 into a 717.
You still have an old airframe with high cycles that will just need retiring anyway.
I just fly them though, what do I know!

 

[pipe]

I was wondering the same thing, especially for the 727 we fly.

Recently, I was told about a program sponsored by Fed-Ex to eliminate the #2 engine in the 727 and replace #'s 1 & 3 with high bypass turbofans. Eventually the program was dumped by Fed-Ex and no one picked it up. The company doing the conversion went out of business.

Someone refresh my memory.

Just another thought:

Airline management clearly has an inability to think long term, this is why nothing has been done.

I wouldn't say it was dumped. It's called a Valsan conversion and we fly some of them. Basically it's a JT8D-217A on the pods and the old engine stays in the 2 hole. Those -217's are basically MD-80 motors. The old engine is typically run at a significantly lower power setting at cruise as it is the least efficient of the three.

Climbs like a rocket, carries a lot of weight, doesn't save a huge amount of gas - but then again it's still an MD-80 motor which is not exactly a technical leap forward. I guess the center engine is really a big APU to run the generator and hyd pump.

PIPE

 

[The_Russian]

Good info Pipe. However, I am not referring to the Super 727 modification. I was speaking of a complete removal of the #2 engine. I just can't remember the name of the company.

 

[chperplt]

I heard AA looked into doing this a few years ago. The modification involved new engines, winglets, and new displays.

The cost was something like 5-7 million per airframe.... A little too steep for an airplane of that age I guess.

 

[airplane wizard]

I was wondering the same thing, especially for the 727 we fly.

Recently, I was told about a program sponsored by Fed-Ex to eliminate the #2 engine in the 727 and replace #'s 1 & 3 with high bypass turbofans. Eventually the program was dumped by Fed-Ex and no one picked it up. The company doing the conversion went out of business.

Someone refresh my memory.

Just another thought:

Airline management clearly has an inability to think long term, this is why nothing has been done.

I thought AA looked into doing that in the early 1980's before they ordered the MD's.

 

[CA1900]

Too bad they couldn't solve the noise issue with this:

http://www.airliners.net/photo/McDonnell-Douglas/McDonnell-Douglas-MD-81(UHB)/0947367/M/

 

[The_Russian]

That project was waaaaay ahead of its time. If they re-introduced it, I'm sure it would fly this day in age.

MD-94X + 20 years of advancement = certification

 

[Cardinal]

CFM is playing with open-rotor options for their Leap56 program, so we'll see what happens.

 

[njcapt]

Too bad they couldn't solve the noise issue with this:

http://www.airliners.net/photo/McDonnell-Douglas/McDonnell-Douglas-MD-81(UHB)/0947367/M/

No kidding - and people think the MU-2 is noisy. The UDF could rip the skin off your body it was so loud, but the noise winner was this thing.

 

[CA1900]

... the noise winner was this thing.

From the article:

The XF-84H was possibly the loudest aircraft ever built, earning the nickname "Thunderscreech" as well as "Mighty Ear Banger." On the ground, they were reportedly audible 25 miles away.

... Ground crew reported that wearing standard ear protectors "made no difference" and a person standing some distance from the airplane was subjected to rapid-fire shock waves. The shock waves acted on the body, causing spasms, nausea and loosening of the bowels.

Holy crap!

 

[AA717driver]

"...spasms, nausea, loosening of the bowels..." Sounds like one of my approaches!


I did hear that the UDF is back on the test stand with new technology to reduce noise. Interesting. TC

 

[ultrarunner]

Dee Howard put Rolls Royce Tay turbofans on UPS's 727's. That seems like a good conversion.

 

[inline]

Engines

I asked the same question a while ago and a responder said that even with fuel efficient engines, the wing on the MDs and DCs weren't that efficient