Figure 8 I believe is total cost per aircraft mile, which takes into account a variety of different costs, not just fuel. Nevertheless, as you pointed out, the MD88 has about 50% more capacity, but figure 8 only shows about 20% more cost to move 50% more seats. Keep in mind that's at much lower fuel costs than we have today. If you continue through the analysis, the author shows that with increasing fuel costs, the fuel inefficiencies of the DC-9 series really begin to catch up with them.
Excellent debate though. I appreciate your willingness to debate the data and abstain from personal attacks.
Yes, the author specifically states that the fuel will catch up with the DC-9 (but it will also catch up with the MD80). Bottom line is that this report is old, actually ancient by todays standard and events of the industry. It provides a nice overview. Thing is, the DC9 and MD80 really have different missions therefore they are tough to compare. We could just as well have the same argument over the DC9 and the 50 seat rj. Unfortunately, I don't have the time to delve further into the information presented. The orginal point I was trying to make (in a very obtuse way) is that you need to ask questions about the information presented, in order to determine the relativeness in the discussion. Similar to the veritas and non sense that is being published by the DALPA Elected officials.
Take care and I really hope that this can be worked out sooner rather than later so that we may all move on with our lives (either flying for our new company or back out on the street).