View Single Post
Old 07-11-2012 | 06:45 AM
  #105268  
forgot to bid's Avatar
forgot to bid
veut gagner à la loterie
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
Default

Originally Posted by shiznit
I'm with gloop, how much savings can 3-16 airplanes in 0-6 months of revenue flying create?

The writer of that article is connecting incongruous pieces of information and calling it analysis, it is trash and shouldn't be taken seriously by anyone who knows anything about this industry.

I disagree with Jerry that if we were outside Sect 6 that we would end up with a 717 rate different than what we have now. (But I do agree about the 79,999 others comment!)

We have a DC9 rate that is already in the contract, and the speed, weight, distance is almost identical to the current DC9. The "we could get the 88 rate" argument is flawed because the current 3.B.6 language doesn't allow DL pilots to refuse to fly the airplane if there is no negotiated rate. Thanks to C2K, now we have to fly it and negotiate a rate (we did in this PWA) and if that fails it goes to arbitration..... Not sure what anyone else thinks, but I bet it would be a tough sell to an arbitrator that a DC9-30 airframe with newer engines and cockpit that seats 110 pax is the equivalent of a 160 seat MD-90. The 25 seat variance between the 319/320 and 32 seat variance between the -700 and -800 would both be tossed out because of the common cockpit/category that those have.
I also would add to the bold that an arbitrator would say a DC9-30 = DC9-30 with new engines, so the DC9 rates (including -30) = 717 rates.

From wiki:

In early 1994 the MD-95 re-emerged bearing far more similarity to the DC-9-30. Indeed the aircraft's specification in terms of weight, dimensions, and fuel capacity are almost identical. The major changes included a fuselage "shrink" back to 119 ft 4 in (36.37 m) length (same as the DC-9-30), and the reversion to the original DC-9 wing of 93 ft 5 in (28.47 m) span. At the time of the redefinition, McDonnell Douglas said that it expected the MD-95 to grow into a family of aircraft with the capability of increased range and seating capacity.[4]

The MD-95 was developed to satisfy the market need to replace early DC-9 models, then approaching 30 years old. The MD-95 project was a complete overhaul of the system, going back to the original DC-9-30 design and reinventing it for modern transport with new engines, cockpit and other more modern systems.[5] Historically, aircraft shrinks have sold poorly, examples of such aircraft in addition to the MD-87 include the Boeing 747SP, Boeing 737-600, Airbus A318, and Airbus A340-200.