Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/5817859/

Topic: Why Did National And Eastern Retire DC-8s By 1974
Username: doulasc
Posted 2013-07-14 11:38:11 and read 8751 times.

Eastern and National Airlines retired their DC-8 fleet by 1974 including their newer stretch DC-8s,National retired their two DC-8-61s in 1975,yet Delta and United kept their DC-8s til the mid 1980s with their stretch DC-8s leaving their fleet before 1990. Why did Eastern and National retire theirs so early? Did the 1973 fuel crisis have something to do with it?

Topic: RE: Why Did National And Eastern Retire DC-8s By 1974
Username: GDB
Posted 2013-07-14 11:44:26 and read 8746 times.

I'd imagine the huge rises in the oil price, following the 1973 Yom Kippur war had something to do with it.
All of a sudden, that type of aircraft became much more expensive to fuel, adding to the general economic malaise caused in the West.

Topic: RE: Why Did National And Eastern Retire DC-8s By 1974
Username: type-rated
Posted 2013-07-14 11:49:19 and read 8714 times.

Also they were acquiring the DC10/L1011 at the time replacing the DC-8 on the more popular (and crowded) routes.

Topic: RE: Why Did National And Eastern Retire DC-8s By 1974
Username: AeroWesty
Posted 2013-07-14 11:50:58 and read 8698 times.

I don't believe that Eastern or National ever converted their fleets to the Super Seventies like Delta and United did.

Topic: RE: Why Did National And Eastern Retire DC-8s By 1974
Username: SpaceshipDC10
Posted 2013-07-14 11:53:51 and read 8682 times.

Quoting doulasc (Thread starter):
Did the 1973 fuel crisis have something to do with it?

Certainly. Have a look at National's DC-8 fleet. They had -20, -30, -50 & -61. Basically only the -61s remained after 1973. It was also a way to simplify the fleet around the B727, the DC-10 and the B747 for a while.

DOUGLAS DC-8

N108RD F-54 45663/189 07/69 07/73 LF RD
N109RD F-54 45674/201 11/69 04/74 LF RD
N276C 51 45641/165 05/62 /72
N278C 51 45643/173 10/62 12/73 CAROLYN
N4901C 31 45274/52 10/62 12/73 CONSTANCE
N6571C 21 45391/38 02/60 06/73 CATHLEEN
N6572C 21 45392/45 03/60 05/73 SALLY
N6573C 21 45393/116 12/60 08/74 DEBORAH
N6574C 21 45394 CANX; NOT BUILT
N6575C 21 45395 CANX; NOT BUILT
N6576C 21 45396 CANX; NOT BUILT
N7181C 32 45602/60 N801US 09/63 12/72
N7182C 32 45603/74 N802US 10/63 06/73 BEVERLY
N7183C 32 45605/95 N804US 10/63 05/74 JOANNE
N7184C 32 45606/115 N805US 07/64 09/72 ROSEMARY
N774C 51 45634/161 02/62 10/73 MARY M
N779C 51 45644/174 11/62 08/73 MARILYN
N8008D 51 45252/1 06/61 05/62 LF DOUGLAS
N875C 51 45635/163 04/62 09/72
N877C 51 45642/172 09/62 06/73 BETTY S
N45090 61 45908/296 08/67 05/75 CATHERINE
N45091 61 45981/352 04/68 05/75 CHRISTINE


Source: Aeromoe

Topic: RE: Why Did National And Eastern Retire DC-8s By 1974
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2013-07-14 13:43:57 and read 8358 times.

[quote=SpaceshipDC10,reply=4]Quoting doulasc (Thread starter):Did the 1973 fuel crisis have something to do with it?

Yes, the OPEC embargo in the early 70s resulted in fuel prices roughly tripling, making older 707s and DC-8s uneconomic, apart from the few passenger operators (mainly UA and DL) with signifcant 60-series fleets which were the only DC-8 models certified for the CFM56 conversion program.

[Edited 2013-07-14 14:08:45]

[Edited 2013-07-14 14:09:22]

Topic: RE: Why Did National And Eastern Retire DC-8s By 1974
Username: B757forever
Posted 2013-07-14 14:06:57 and read 8283 times.

Quoting doulasc (Thread starter):
Delta and United kept their DC-8s til the mid 1980s with their stretch DC-8s leaving their fleet before 1990.

I believe DL was the last to retire them. IIRC, the last DL DC-8 retired May 1989.

Topic: RE: Why Did National And Eastern Retire DC-8s By 1974
Username: atlengineer
Posted 2013-07-14 14:13:39 and read 8259 times.

Quoting B757forever (Reply 6):
I believe DL was the last to retire them. IIRC, the last DL DC-8 retired May 1989.

And I think most were converted to freighter and went to UPS which retired them in 2009.

ATLengineer

Topic: RE: Why Did National And Eastern Retire DC-8s By 1974
Username: SpaceshipDC10
Posted 2013-07-14 15:26:22 and read 8101 times.

Quoting B757forever (Reply 6):
I believe DL was the last to retire them.

No. United was the last one on October 31, 1991. United DC-8's (by Ual777contrail Jan 21 2003 in Civil Aviation)

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 5):
Yes, the OPEC embargo in the early 70s resulted in fuel prices roughly tripling, making older 707s and DC-8s uneconomic

TW grounded its gas guzzler CV880 at that time.

Topic: RE: Why Did National And Eastern Retire DC-8s By 1974
Username: Tango-Bravo
Posted 2013-07-14 21:28:46 and read 7169 times.

Quoting doulasc (Thread starter):
Eastern and National Airlines retired their DC-8 fleet by 1974 including their newer stretch DC-8s,National retired their two DC-8-61s in 1975... Why did Eastern and National retire theirs so early?

By the time oil prices spiked in late 1973, only 5 standard/'short' DC-8s (of 16 in their fleet as of mid-1972) remained in service with NA. By that time EA had disposed of all their 'short' DC-8s and retained only 6 of their original 23 'stretch' DC-8-61/-63PFs. It would seem therefore, that NA's and EA's 'early' retirement of their DC-8s was due mainly if not entirely to their being replaced by DC-10s and L-1011s and probably even more so by 727-200 Advanced (longer range, higher payload than earlier versions of the 727-200) deliveries.

EA retired/sold the last of their 'Stretch' Eights (a pair of -63PFs) in February 1974. In EA's case especially, there were other factors favorable to 'early' retirement of their 'long' DC-8s. Before and after oil prices spiked in 1973 (and several years beyond) there was a very strong seller's market for used DC-8-61/-63s. EA's -63PFs were especially desirable (and in very limited supply) inasmuch as they had been designed and built to be converted to freighters at minimal cost and downtime. IIRC EA made a sizeable profit on the sale of their -63PFs. Also, EA had purchased their DC-8-63PFs in anticipation of South Pacific route awards...that went instead to AA (and/or CO?), which made the type essentially redundant to EA's fleet requirements throughout their brief stay at EA.

[Edited 2013-07-14 21:31:09]

Topic: RE: Why Did National And Eastern Retire DC-8s By 1974
Username: hOmSAr
Posted 2013-07-14 22:03:57 and read 6973 times.

Quoting Tango-Bravo (Reply 9):
EA retired/sold the last of their 'Stretch' Eights (a pair of -63PFs) in February 1974. In EA's case especially, there were other factors favorable to 'early' retirement of their 'long' DC-8s. Before and after oil prices spiked in 1973 (and several years beyond) there was a very strong seller's market for used DC-8-61/-63s. EA's -63PFs were especially desirable (and in very limited supply) inasmuch as they had been designed and built to be converted to freighters at minimal cost and downtime. IIRC EA made a sizeable profit on the sale of their -63PFs. Also, EA had purchased their DC-8-63PFs in anticipation of South Pacific route awards...that went instead to AA (and/or CO?), which made the type essentially redundant to EA's fleet requirements throughout their brief stay at EA.

So, in a way, there are some similarities to the DC-8-60 series and the MD-11, in that passenger operators fairly quickly found better alternatives, but freight carriers really could make some good use of them.

Topic: RE: Why Did National And Eastern Retire DC-8s By 1974
Username: mayor
Posted 2013-07-14 22:53:04 and read 6719 times.

Quoting SpaceshipDC10 (Reply 8):

TW grounded its gas guzzler CV880 at that time.

As did DL.

Topic: RE: Why Did National And Eastern Retire DC-8s By 1974
Username: ImperialEagle
Posted 2013-07-15 03:59:36 and read 5733 times.

Tango Bravo pretty much summed it up. Just prior to the fuel embargo there was a pretty strong market for the earlier pure-jet models as well. Once the embargo hit the airlines couldn't wait to retire the first generation guzzlers and standardize on the new wide-bodies. AA hung on with the 707's though!

Topic: RE: Why Did National And Eastern Retire DC-8s By 1974
Username: airzim
Posted 2013-07-15 04:29:47 and read 5561 times.

I would also suspect that UA needed at least three engine airplanes to serve Hawaii since ETOPS was not available then. Eastern nor national served routes that required that kind of overwater capability. Just a guess

Topic: RE: Why Did National And Eastern Retire DC-8s By 1974
Username: WA707atMSP
Posted 2013-07-15 06:38:08 and read 4829 times.

Quoting airzim (Reply 13):
Eastern nor national served routes that required that kind of overwater capability. Just a guess

National's only route at the time of their DC-8 retirement that required 3 / 4 engined equipment was MIA-LHR, which was served initially with leased DC-8-54s, and later with 747s and DC-10-30s. NA subsequently added more routes to Europe, which were served by DC-10-30s, and MIA-SJU, which was served by DC-10-10s and possibly 727s.

Eastern, however, needed 3 / 4 engine equipment for many of their flights to the Caribbean. However, as others have said, EA's large fleets of 727s and L-1011s could easily cover these routes.

Topic: RE: Why Did National And Eastern Retire DC-8s By 1974
Username: AeroWesty
Posted 2013-07-15 06:47:37 and read 4768 times.

Quoting WA707atMSP (Reply 14):
National's only route at the time of their DC-8 retirement that required 3 / 4 engined equipment was MIA-LHR

What other equipment other than 3 or 4-engined jets at the time could have flown National's nonstops from Miami to California?

http://www.departedflights.com/NA070174p12.html

Topic: RE: Why Did National And Eastern Retire DC-8s By 1974
Username: DTWPurserBoy
Posted 2013-07-15 09:08:20 and read 3931 times.

Quoting SpaceshipDC10 (Reply 4):

N276C 51 45641/165 05/62 /72
N278C 51 45643/173 10/62 12/73 CAROLYN
Quoting SpaceshipDC10,reply=4
:
N875C 51 45635/163 04/62 09/72
N877C 51 45642/172 09/62 06/73 BETTY S

These four DC-8-51's were sold to Braniff International in 1973 and were used in a 150 passenger configuration primarily for charters. Later 2 more DC-8-51's from Delta were added and used in the late '70's domestically to DEN and MIA, among other routes.

After Braniff folded three were scrapped. One was converted to a freighter and used in Central America for a number of years. The two DL aircraft were returned to the leaser. The DC-8-62's soldiered on until 1982 when Braniff ceased operations. One was later converted to a DC-8-72 and was used by NASA--this aircraft may still be in use. The others were transferred to several different carriers including Rich International. Some were converted to freighters and may still be plowing around somewhere. One was sold to a Latin American airline and crashed.

Topic: RE: Why Did National And Eastern Retire DC-8s By 1974
Username: maxpower1954
Posted 2013-07-15 09:17:15 and read 3893 times.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 15):
What other equipment other than 3 or 4-engined jets at the time could have flown National's nonstops from Miami to California?

The A300 is the only one I can think of, but was available late in the timeline of National's existence - Eastern didn't start operating them until 1977 or 78 IIRC. National merged into PAA in 1980.

Topic: RE: Why Did National And Eastern Retire DC-8s By 1974
Username: OzarkD9S
Posted 2013-07-15 12:59:52 and read 3069 times.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 15):


What other equipment other than 3 or 4-engined jets at the time could have flown National's nonstops from Miami to California?

Northeast flew the 727-100 MIA-LAX. Not sure if there were any modifications/penalties...maybe someone in the know could enlighten us?

I realize 727s are 3 engined, but DC-8/10 wasn't necessary for the route.

[Edited 2013-07-15 13:04:14]

Topic: RE: Why Did National And Eastern Retire DC-8s By 1974
Username: BoeingGuy
Posted 2013-07-15 13:59:56 and read 2986 times.

Quoting OzarkD9S (Reply 18):
Northeast flew the 727-100 MIA-LAX. Not sure if there were any modifications/penalties...maybe someone in the know could enlighten us?

Supposedly they sometimes had to stop in IAH on the westbound leg. There was another thread about this NE route a few months ago.

I believe that DL applied for LAX-MIA but wasn't granted it during the regulated era.

Topic: RE: Why Did National And Eastern Retire DC-8s By 1974
Username: mayor
Posted 2013-07-15 21:05:00 and read 2790 times.

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 19):
I believe that DL applied for LAX-MIA but wasn't granted it during the regulated era.

There was to be a Northeast/Northwest merger and everything was going along well, until the CAB said that the LAX-MIA route, which was NE's, was not going to be part of the merger. NW said it should be all or nothing and they backed out and DL jumped in, but they were also refused permission to operate the route.

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 19):
Supposedly they sometimes had to stop in IAH on the westbound leg. There was another thread about this NE route a few months ago.

I would think that there would have to be certain times of the year when they HAD to make a fuel stop.

Topic: RE: Why Did National And Eastern Retire DC-8s By 1974
Username: Tango-Bravo
Posted 2013-07-15 22:08:38 and read 2733 times.

Quoting ImperialEagle (Reply 12):
Once the embargo hit the airlines couldn't wait to retire the first generation guzzlers and standardize on the new wide-bodies.

Looking at the historic fleets of NA and EA, it appears to me that both were already well into the process of retiring their first generation fuel-thirsty jets prior to the onset of the oil embargo that started in October 1973. As noted above, the DC-8 fleets of both were greatly diminished months before 10/73.

At the same time NA and EA were phasing out their DC-8s in the 1971-73 time period prior to the embargo, they were also taking delivery of then-current generation narrow- and wide-body types on a more or less 1:1 basis:

NA took delivery of 9 DC-10-10s from 11/71 to 12/72, plus 2 DC-10-30s in 06/73, having retired the same total number (11) of DC-8s prior to the embargo. Two more DC-10-10s were added in 6/75, arriving the month after the departure of their two DC-8-61s.

From 09/72 to 06/73, EA added 15 727-225Adv to their fleet; by 09/73 21 L-1011s had also been delivered. Prior to the embargo, 31 DC-8s had been retired, with only 7 remaining.

Following a similar pattern, from 01/73 to 11/73 Delta took delivery of 16 727-232Adv, 5 DC-10-10s (lsf UA), and 4 L-1011s. By 01/74 16 CV-880s (incl. one written off in 12/72) plus 4 non-fan DC-8-32s were gone.

My own interpretation of the above is that all 3 airlines seemed to have a plan to replace their 1st-Gen guzzlers that had been in progress well before the 1973-74 oil embargo. The concurrent timing of the embargo and replacment of 1st-Gen types with (then) current-Gen types was therefore largely a coincidence IMHO...although, admittedly, I also do not doubt that the fallout from the embargo caused the U.S. airlines to retire a fair-to-large number 1st-Gen 4-engine types before the timeframe originally planned.

Topic: RE: Why Did National And Eastern Retire DC-8s By 1974
Username: SpaceshipDC10
Posted 2013-07-16 04:04:51 and read 2613 times.

Quoting OzarkD9S (Reply 18):
I realize 727s are 3 engined, but DC-8/10 wasn't necessary for the route.

I'm not 100% sure, but I guess all of NA MIA-LAX stopped en route at IAH and there are many pictures of their DC-10 at LAX and SAN.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © J Allen King
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © I Spashett



National had these transcontinental routes:

MIA-IAH-LAX
TPA-MSY-LAX-SAN
MCO-MSY-LAX-SAN

Topic: RE: Why Did National And Eastern Retire DC-8s By 1974
Username: maxpower1954
Posted 2013-07-16 06:14:22 and read 2532 times.

Quoting SpaceshipDC10 (Reply 22):
I'm not 100% sure, but I guess all of NA MIA-LAX stopped en route at IAH and there are many pictures of their DC-10 at LAX and SAN.

No, National operated non-stop between LAX, MIA and TPA as far back as 1962.

http://www.timetableimages.com/ttimages/complete/na62/na62-3.jpg

Topic: RE: Why Did National And Eastern Retire DC-8s By 1974
Username: cf6ppe
Posted 2013-07-16 06:18:15 and read 2523 times.

Quoting Tango-Bravo (Reply 21):
Looking at the historic fleets of NA and EA, it appears to me that both were already well into the process of retiring their first generation fuel-thirsty jets prior to the onset of the oil embargo that started in October 1973. As noted above, the DC-8 fleets of both were greatly diminished months before 10/73.

Additional comments re: EAL DC8s...

I arrived on the EAL Powerplant Engineering scene in the spring of 1970.

The DC8 fleet had consisted of 14 ea. JT4A-11 powered D821 frames, three ea. JT3D-3B powered D851s (of two different types), 17 ea. JT3D-3B powered D861s and six ea. JT3D-7 powered D863s.

Prior to 1970 several of the D861s were leased to JAL for inter Japan routes configured in high density configurations. Many of the D861s eventually ended up at JAL. Note that EAL had operated the D861s in ~180 to 189 seat configurations (lower in winter due to coats, and higher in summer w/o coats). It is possible to jam in 248-252 seats one class and this was probably what JAL used.

With the arrival of the L1011s (beginning in spring 1972), several of the DC8-63s were kept around to cover for and supplement the at that time unreliable L10s. Every morning on the 10:00AM Maintenance call during the introduction of the L10s, it was reported which of the D863s were covering for the L10s, then one day it was excitedly reported that an L10 had covered for a D863.

But, as soon as the L10s got going, the D863s were gone. By that time I was working upgrading the RB.211-22Cs to RB.211-22Bs and trying to get their early reliability and longevity problems cured.

Comments re: these DC8s as being fuel guzzlers is certainly true when comparing the early '70s to any date after the mid-'70s. IIRC fuel costs were in the $0.11 to $0.30 range. JT3D's had a TFSC bucket low of ~0.505 while either of the new widebody Powerplants - RB.211-22B or CF6-6D - had comparable TSFCs of ~0.35.

Another fuel consumption comparison of the JT3D powered DC8s and B707s is that they used ~2200 gals/hr at economy cruise with 160 to 189 seats while the L10s at a similar cruise use ~2400 gals/hr with ~290 seats. I'm sure that the DC10-10s had fuel consumption similar to the L10s.

It has been about 40 years since I worked on the EAL DC8 powerplants...
You've got to realize some of the facts are a whole lot faded in my memory...
Please be gentle...

Topic: RE: Why Did National And Eastern Retire DC-8s By 1974
Username: planespotting
Posted 2013-07-16 08:11:55 and read 2504 times.

Quoting cf6ppe (Reply 24):
Another fuel consumption comparison of the JT3D powered DC8s and B707s is that they used ~2200 gals/hr at economy cruise with 160 to 189 seats while the L10s at a similar cruise use ~2400 gals/hr with ~290 seats. I'm sure that the DC10-10s had fuel consumption similar to the L10s.

Is that per engine or aggregate fuel burn? Of course, even if it's per engine the L10 would have superior economy (3 engines vs 4 engines and with more passengers)

Topic: RE: Why Did National And Eastern Retire DC-8s By 1974
Username: mayor
Posted 2013-07-16 08:39:36 and read 2473 times.

Quoting Tango-Bravo (Reply 21):
My own interpretation of the above is that all 3 airlines seemed to have a plan to replace their 1st-Gen guzzlers that had been in progress well before the 1973-74 oil embargo. The concurrent timing of the embargo and replacment of 1st-Gen types with (then) current-Gen types was therefore largely a coincidence IMHO...although, admittedly, I also do not doubt that the fallout from the embargo caused the U.S. airlines to retire a fair-to-large number 1st-Gen 4-engine types before the timeframe originally planned.

I'm sure the plans were already in the works at DL, but the oil embargo certainly hastened the process of acquiring new a/c and getting rid of the old ones. The advent of widebodies in the fleet also made it easier to get rid of the L-100 freighters.

Topic: RE: Why Did National And Eastern Retire DC-8s By 1974
Username: maxpower1954
Posted 2013-07-16 14:58:26 and read 2324 times.

Quoting cf6ppe (Reply 24):
Additional comments re: EAL DC8s...

I arrived on the EAL Powerplant Engineering scene in the spring of 1970.

The DC8 fleet had consisted of 14 ea. JT4A-11 powered D821 frames, three ea. JT3D-3B powered D851s (of two different types), 17 ea. JT3D-3B powered D861s and six ea. JT3D-7 powered D863s.

Prior to 1970 several of the D861s were leased to JAL for inter Japan routes configured in high density configurations. Many of the D861s eventually ended up at JAL. Note that EAL had operated the D861s in ~180 to 189 seat configurations (lower in winter due to coats, and higher in summer w/o coats). It is possible to jam in 248-252 seats one class and this was probably what JAL used.

With the arrival of the L1011s (beginning in spring 1972), several of the DC8-63s were kept around to cover for and supplement the at that time unreliable L10s. Every morning on the 10:00AM Maintenance call during the introduction of the L10s, it was reported which of the D863s were covering for the L10s, then one day it was excitedly reported that an L10 had covered for a D863.

But, as soon as the L10s got going, the D863s were gone. By that time I was working upgrading the RB.211-22Cs to RB.211-22Bs and trying to get their early reliability and longevity problems cured.

Comments re: these DC8s as being fuel guzzlers is certainly true when comparing the early '70s to any date after the mid-'70s. IIRC fuel costs were in the $0.11 to $0.30 range. JT3D's had a TFSC bucket low of ~0.505 while either of the new widebody Powerplants - RB.211-22B or CF6-6D - had comparable TSFCs of ~0.35.

Another fuel consumption comparison of the JT3D powered DC8s and B707s is that they used ~2200 gals/hr at economy cruise with 160 to 189 seats while the L10s at a similar cruise use ~2400 gals/hr with ~290 seats. I'm sure that the DC10-10s had fuel consumption similar to the L10s.

It has been about 40 years since I worked on the EAL DC8 powerplants...
You've got to realize some of the facts are a whole lot faded in my memory...
Please be gentle...

That was great information! I was a new flight engineer at Airlift International in the late 1970s and we ended up with quite a bit of EAL DC-8 support equipment. On thing I remember was a working scale model of the MLG and spoiler mixing mechanism for ground school instruction - it was very cool! Later at Arrow Air, I flew my last trip as a DC-8 captain in the same aircraft that crashed at Gander in 1985, which was a former Eastern -63PF.

[Edited 2013-07-16 14:59:49]

Topic: RE: Why Did National And Eastern Retire DC-8s By 1974
Username: cf6ppe
Posted 2013-07-16 16:18:53 and read 2249 times.

Quoting planespotting (Reply 25):
Quoting cf6ppe (Reply 24):
Another fuel consumption comparison of the JT3D powered DC8s and B707s is that they used ~2200 gals/hr at economy cruise with 160 to 189 seats while the L10s at a similar cruise use ~2400 gals/hr with ~290 seats. I'm sure that the DC10-10s had fuel consumption similar to the L10s.
Quoting planespotting (Reply 25):
Is that per engine or aggregate fuel burn? Of course, even if it's per engine the L10 would have superior economy (3 engines vs 4 engines and with more passengers)

Hi, sorry that I didn't make it more clear that the GPH numbers were on a per aircraft basis.

Thank you for asking me to clear up that point.

I didn't include fuel consumption dialog on the D821 fleet (D833 would be similar) but I remember the comments that they used fuel like an old Buick Century*, i.e., that they could pass every thing but a gas station. Interestingly, the JT4A powerplant had more climb thrust than the JT3D-3B by using turbo-jet brute force thrust. But the JT3D had the lower cruise fuel flow.
*IIRC, A early 40s Buick Century had the Buick Special (lightest) body with a dual carb straight eight Buick Roadmaster (biggest) engine and was not known for its gas mileage; probably due to heavy footed drivers.

Topic: RE: Why Did National And Eastern Retire DC-8s By 1974
Username: Tango-Bravo
Posted 2013-07-16 20:32:01 and read 2104 times.

Quoting mayor (Reply 26):
I'm sure the plans were already in the works at DL, but the oil embargo certainly hastened the process of acquiring new a/c and getting rid of the old ones.

Inasmuch as DL (as well as EA, NA and others) had a substantial number of new-generation aircraft entering service (which would have been ordered somewhere in the 1968-'71 timeframe) well before the 1973-74 oil embargo, in ample numbers to replace the capacity provided by their non-fanjet (as well as some fanjet) types and...

...Whereas there seems to be no doubt as to 1st generation types being retired ~immediately in the wake of the embargo, earlier than originally planned...

Had the embargo not occurred what was DL's plan for the 15 CV-880s and 4 DC-8-32s that presumably would have remained with DL beyond 01/74? Did they scale back on expanding their flight schedules or reduce flights?...or did they maintain or slightly expand their timetable and increase utilization of their newer, more efficient types to cover the flying hours that had been planned (pre-embargo) for their '880s and non-fan DC-8s prior to their hastened retirements?

Topic: RE: Why Did National And Eastern Retire DC-8s By 1974
Username: mayor
Posted 2013-07-16 22:03:03 and read 2047 times.

Quoting Tango-Bravo (Reply 29):

I don't believe that the oil embargo was the deciding factor when ordering the widebodies and 727s, but, as I said, it certainly moved things along in that regard. I'm sure the plans were already made on what to buy and when and when to retire the 880s and smaller DC-8s. I have no proof of this statement, but I'm sure it was easy to order a substantial number of new 727-200s from Boeing as DL was one of the last airlines to buy an initial batch.

Topic: RE: Why Did National And Eastern Retire DC-8s By 1974
Username: DTWPurserBoy
Posted 2013-07-17 10:46:48 and read 1882 times.

Quoting mayor (Reply 30):
I don't believe that the oil embargo was the deciding factor when ordering the widebodies and 727s, but, as I said, it certainly moved things along in that regard. I'm sure the plans were already made on what to buy and when and when to retire the 880s and smaller DC-8s. I have no proof of this statement, but I'm sure it was easy to order a substantial number of new 727-200s from Boeing as DL was one of the last airlines to buy an initial batch."A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed

Another problem was that as early as September, 1970, terrorism had raised its ugly head with the destruction of a VC-10, a DC-8 and a B707 in Jordan and then a brand new 747 in Cairo. Airline traffic tanked as people were afraid to fly. I remember when TW had the cockpit blown off a 707 in the middle east and there were unspecified threats about more sabotage in the US, specifically against TW. I flew on a TW 747 from IAD to SFO with about 15 people on it. IIRC it was in late 1970 and early 1971 that many airlines started retiring their first generation "water wagons" or at least parking them temporarily. By the end of 1973, Braniff had disposed of all of their 707-227, 720-027, 707-138B and 707-327C aircraft.


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/