I couldn't agree with you more. When you are sitting in a 43 year old DC9-30 and there is a 30+ million dollar RJ next to you (CPZ), one starts thinking. If the solution was truly based on acquisition costs then why would CPZ operate a 30+ million dollar jets when management could place a 100-seat, paid for Douglas on the same route? When I hear about cheap, third world MD's hitting the property while block hours are increasing at CPZ it becomes painfully obvious that the company will NEVER return 100 seat flying to mainline, even if they have to operate a higher frequency RJ fleet to domestic city pairs. Alaska flying 737s from small and large west coast city pairs to Hawaii in direct competition with Delta is over the top. So the reality is, Delta doesn't want a 100 seat mainline jet and hopes to contract out the 150+ seat market while they are at it. Time to update the old Logbook.

That (the highlighted part) is a major major problem.

As to the 88, I think if you could totally remove and replace the engines on the 80 then it'd been done by now by AMR. Just looking at the mods the 90 got over the 88 shows how prohibitive it would be.

That said, I'm curious as to how well that TR mod I linked that AMR is looking at will work. Because the MD88 sits at about 19 years old with 70% of them under 35,000 cycles on a plane that has a 110,000 cycle limit. We're flying the 9 to 40 years old, so that could leave the 88 with 20 more years in the fleet.

Sailing is right with maintenance costs increasing as aircraft age and I don't have the numbers for our fleet. But as I remember looking at the Embraer Legacy I managed (including managing maintenance :mad:) what happens is you have your A, B, C and the big D checks (or its equivalent in the EMB world) based on 400 hours and 6 months. At the 4 year point you do what most would call the D check and then you restart, and then do it again 4 years later and restart, and then after so many years and hours the time between D checks becomes more frequent to the point it one day becomes prohibitive. I remember the cost of that first D check being in the $180,000 range I want to say and the man hours to remove the interior was out of sight. $100K of that is labor which is where the money is although screwing you over on part prices is also big money in the GA world. The total cost over 5 years was $500K. So when the plane really ages and those checks get compressed then you're well over $500K in 4 years, then 3, then less.

All that to say, the point is the 9 kept going until 40 years. I think the 88s buys you time and money like the 9.

Sailing, the thing is AirTran started with the 9 until it could buy the 717. Spirit went from the 80 to the Airbuses, Midwest 9s and 80s to 717s, Jetblue was unique in its startup. When the time and opportunity is right I'm sure they'll buy new narrowbodys because like TOGA said you need some good lead-in time with new planes especially. But as reported tonight that won't be in the coming 18 months.

the ezopenboard charts are very interesting. Also they have in there the number of retirements monthly with Category and age included. Looks like the majority of those that are punching out are doing so at 60.

on a side note, I saw that we had a couple 70+ year olds retire in January off the panel :eek:

The problem with an engine swap is that manufacturers make money supporting the engine (leases, maintenance, etc.). With an airframe targeted for only another 10 years, 15 tops, it's doubtful GE, Pratt or Rolls would invest the capital to update such an old fleet. Nothing prevents an airline from engineering it's own parts and STC's (like AA's Tulsa operation), but the airline would also have to benefit from the initial capital expenditure of new engines, testing, STC's, airframe modifications, inspections, etc. Not likely at a company that farms it's MX out to places like Dothan, AL and S. America.

Friends:

What I suspect it boils down to is Delta is not going to commit to a narrow body jet until it gets its 70-90-100 seat flying figured out. That means determining what it is going to do with tens of billions in fee for departure contracts.

The easy answer is to come up with more outsourcing to entice these operators into making the changes Delta wants.

Hence the reason Sailing says management simply does not want to operate a 100 to 130 seat jet right now. If management isn't convinced we are going to hold firm on scope, then they are smart to bide their time until uncertainties in the airframe and labor market are figured out.

Hence the reason I would like ALPA to clear this up for management with a firm commitment to its members

Better yet - imagine you are in an aisle seat and the FA's can walk by without smashing their buttocks into your shoulder..........17 times on a 3.5 hr flight.:rolleyes:

Scoop

NewK

That's member only with a subscription, isn't it?

It used to be NWA (DALN) only, didn't it?

Do you find it worth the cost?

thanks,

some parts are free. You can sign up for free and have access to the crystal ball and wheres waldo functions.

So, let it be written. So, let it be done.

Super got it. Under the old system, it was worth the cost. Most of it does not work now, because of the new interface (??) with the DAL computers. But, if it ever get back up to speed, I would renew again. He lets you use it for free for a month or so, which get's you hooked.

What would take you 20 minutes in the old NWA system, you could do in 1 or 2 in ezopenboard.