A320 NEO vs 737

Reply Subscribe

Page 4 of 4

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

12-08-2010, 05:42 PM

#31

Too Tall

Gets Weekends Off

Thread Starter

Joined APC: Sep 2006

Position: Mad Doggy

Posts: 250

Quote:

Originally Posted by forgot to bid

They won't move until there is a better option then cheap MD equipment and super efficient MD90s. Someone mentioned one of the things the DC-9-50 has going for it is not only is it paid for but the engines are dirt cheap which according to them offsets fuel inefficiency especially divided out over its 125 seat frame.

As was said in the crewroom they are after all 115 or 116 MD90s in existence including the Saudi's with the 717-LIKE cockpit.

According to this the $60M 160 pax 738 burns 7611 lbs on a 500nm trip, the also 160 pax but $8-12M and 10-14 year old MD90 burns 7800 lbs and the 8600 lbs or about 150 gal more for a total cost of somewhere around $330 more at $2.2/gal. Thus, the question is and seems to already be answered, put the MD80s on the shorter range flights and 737s on the longer and thus do you have enough 737s given your huge fleet of 757s? I think nothing will be done until there is a Boeing replacement, just hope the Boeing replacement is worth the wait.

Source: Similar Aircraft Comparisons Chart

I had no idea the the MD90s were so efficient, maybe Delta should have kept their MD90 plan a little more quite, wouldn't want American getting any ideas.

12-08-2010, 05:58 PM

#32

iaflyer

seeing the large hubs...

Joined APC: Oct 2006

Position: 73N A

Posts: 3,707

Quote:

Originally Posted by Too Tall

I had no idea the the MD90s were so efficient, maybe Delta should have kept their MD90 plan a little more quite, wouldn't want American getting any ideas.

Nah, too few MD90s for American. Did you know they fly 282 MD-80s? I didn't - that a s-load of planes. They are parking them anyway, transitioning to the 737 (which holds more people). Delta isn't getting rid of the MD-88 fleet, so it makes sense to get some more (similar ones) while they are cheap.

12-08-2010, 11:27 PM

#33

gloopy

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Jul 2010

Position: window seat

Posts: 12,522

Quote:

Originally Posted by Too Tall

So the question is when will Delta and American become more aggressive with fleet modernization? Seems that the writing is on the wall with the fuel prices. American and Delta seem to have the least efficient narrow bodies with all the Mad Dogs.

Delta and to a lesser but philosophically similar extent AA, seem to be waiting for the "next gen" narrowbody alternative from any mumber of manufacturers. Fuel is high, but not at the crisis point...yet, and the cash + credit outlay for such a large scale renewal (several hundred aircraft each for AA and DL) comes a time when both are focusing on massive debt reduction.

Not sure what AA is planning long term, but DL seems to be conserving cash and paying down debt and getting almost free MD90's in a "wait them out" scenario. What the heck, as they are very cheap and almost as efficient as the current cream of the crop as it is (73NG and A320). Hard to argue with that. Again not sure about AA but DL will slash over 7B in debt in the span of just a couple more years. Load up on credit and debt now, or wait a few years and get the inevitable renewal on much better terms, lower impact to the balance sheet, and bonus...15%(ish) more fuel efficency. Hard to argue with that.