Will we ever see another a/c like the MD-80 again?

[PhatAJ2008]

Seems like such a great workhorse... Why were no airlines interested in it it causing them to cease production of the 717?

 

[CitationLover]

simple: 737 is the reason.

Why would boeing continue production of an aircraft that was designed to eat into it's 737 market share?

 

[MD11Drvr]

Boeing is not interested in supporting anything Douglas designed. The DC-8 is still a major thorn in their a## and has been for 40 plus years and that is not to mention the DC-10 is still a better cargo aircraft (minus fuel) than the 767 is. As for the MD-11 it appears the 777 cargo is a close replacement and less fuel to operate. Older airplanes are still tough to beat as long as fuel stays in check.

Just my opinion and I look forward to getting to fly a Boeing product, won't say that about an Airbus though.

 

[hockeypilot44]

Boeing is not interested in supporting anything Douglas designed. The DC-8 is still a major thorn in their a## and has been for 40 plus years and that is not to mention the DC-10 is still a better cargo aircraft (minus fuel) than the 767 is. As for the MD-11 it appears the 777 cargo is a close replacement and less fuel to operate. Older airplanes are still tough to beat as long as fuel stays in check.

Just my opinion and I look forward to getting to fly a Boeing product, won't say that about an Airbus though.

I've flown Embraer's, Boeing's, and Airbus's. I'll take an Airbus any day over the previous two. I start flying a DC-9 soon. My verdict is not out on Douglas birds yet.

 

[PhatAJ2008]

simple: 737 is the reason.

Why would boeing continue production of an aircraft that was designed to eat into it's 737 market share?

Good point... Although there had to be things the MD-80 did better than the 737.

 

[Patriot328]

I've flown Embraer's, Boeing's, and Airbus's. I'll take an Airbus any day over the previous two. I start flying a DC-9 soon. My verdict is not out on Douglas birds yet.

I agree, but I've never flown a Douglas bird, so I too cannot compare that to the others.

 

[CitationLover]

Good point... Although there had to be things the MD-80 did better than the 737.

Boeing might strip those things off and have put it into the -800/900 for all we know. I am sure it was purely an economic decision from Boeing's standpoint. 717 sales were declining, 737 sales booming. Why stretch the 717 to compete with themselves (which was what I thought McD wanted to do with it's MD-95).

I agree though, the DC-9 series was a tank, flew like a tank, and had a great dispatch reliability.

 

[LandGreen]

Good point... Although there had to be things the MD-80 did better than the 737.

i'd rather sit in a md 80 cockpit anyday compared to 737. 1. noise level 2. limited range.

737 has way too much range for a cockpit designed for a 1.5 hour flight!

only bad thing about an 80 is landing on contaminated runways. bad brakes!

 

[aa73]

Boeings build airplanes, Douglas builds character. You slow down in a Boeing to put flaps out.... you put flaps out to slow down in a Douglas.

4500hrs of MD80 time never diminished my opinion of the airplane - built like a tank, flew like one, too once you learned to finesse the flight guidance, it was actually a fun bird. It was very quiet and has lots of elbow room (compared to a 737, where the side window is right in your face.)

757/767 is a whole different world, makes it a much easier job.

 

[Mike man]

Will we ever see another a/c like the MD-80 again?

No...