Before going to the 757 14 months ago flew with two mechanics (now captains) who worked on Dc'9s in Atlanta. I can't remember when these guys were hired as pilots but they were pretty junior captains so I'm assuming the earliest was the mid 90's. At the time most of the 9's except the -10's had many hours left on the them. Many were at only half time.
Two of my roommates at the crashpad were senior 9 instructors before becoming 320 instructors and then 330 instructors. Before changing fleets, the 9s were very young in terms of hours.
Either the 9s have been flying 24 hours a day doing touch and goes (cycles) for the past 10 years and accumulating thousand of hours in a short period of time, or someone is passing on bad information that the 9s will need heavy maintenance in 2012 and thus will need to be retired. OR someone is just trying to prove that our toys are better and your toys are trashy.
Time will tell.

Now that SLI is complete, trashing the 9 has no value.

I can't remember but I thought it was DAL management via line check pilot meetings that said some of the 9s will need it. They also said the 747s will come up on cost prohibitive heavy maintenance within a few years as well hence the rumored replacement with 777s. So I don't really think its just people making it up on the forum for fun or to antagonize anyone, although that doesn't mean its good info.

The -9s could go into the 2020's in theory based on hours. That's per the fleet manager last year. The limitations on the -9s are more on navigation because of the vors being retired. If they update the navigation with gps they could fly alot longer. The EGPWS already installed in the planes supposedly have the capability of being used for navigation with some other modifications.

The navy has already converted some -9's with digital cockpits. That would be cheaper than buying new planes.

I know that a lot of the DC9s have YEARS of Life left. Many could fly through 2020. However, I believe the earlier poster was referring to issues other then timed out airframes. Some of our 9s are approaching a VERY expensive rear pressure bulkhead replacement which even former NW management wasn't willing to pay for. I think all the 9s must be RNAV compliant after 2012 as well, and while I'm sure management has explored converting the DC9s to glass they won't follow through.

So like I said earlier, it's not about the DC9s ability to fly through 2020, but rather expensive overhauls. I don't want to see the old girl go:(, but I didn't want to see the 727 go either.:(

Once again Sailingfun, you put out BS information. Some of your post has a possibility of occuring, but what I've highlighted in bold font is pure BS. Why do you do that? Is this just more of your "culture of hate" stuff?

Carl

All Navy C-9s are retired and replaced by 737s (C-40).

That wasn't my point, the point is that a conversion is available.

Second point is that I don't care if it's DC-9's, 737's, or DC-3's for that matter as long as that flying stays at mainline. Hopefully our pilots have learned their lessons on Giving their, our jobs away to the lowest bidder.

On that we're in 100% agreement. The DC-9 needs to be replaced by mainline equipment. The sooner the better. One of the best aspects of the merger IMO is that it gives us a chance to recapture the 100 seat category (and you to retain it). The number of jobs that went out the door with our 737-200s/300s is disgusting.

The merger brought over both airlines' lousy, bankruptcy, scope language intact. The plan was to replace the DC9's with the 90/76/70 seat RJ's. That plan is still valid if fuel prices return to a more normal range. The third generation of RJ's is a better, cheaper (ASM & trip) and more flexible airplane than the DC9 and its derivative airplanes.

What is happening now is that the DC9's and MD88's are being used to reduce capacity on flights that would have been served by 757's (at least on the Delta side). This a move most of us did not anticipate even six months ago and is the direct result of Spring and Summer bookings scaring Delta's planners into executing longer term capacity reductions than they originally planned.

I want the 100 seat flying to remain with mainline, but we need to be aware our contract does not currently ensure that protection. What we see now is a momentary blip.

We also have 737 flying outsourced to Alaska and 717 flying outsourced to MidWest. Management has not optimized this situation and I do no know that they will.

Bottom line - if we are serious about retaining the 100 seat flying we need to get Compass and Mesaba stapled ASAP to one list and work on closing the codeshare loopholes at our next Section 6 opportunity.

To do this we will have to convince the senior half of our lists that selling scope is not the yellow brick road to higher pay rates. They've been voting to sell scope for a decade now, changing their minds will not be easy.