FutureB6Capt From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 108 posts, RR: 0 Posted (9 years 5 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6632 times:
This isn't a slam towards B6 at all (hence my username)-but why do you think they decided to go with the A320 instead of MD-80 series. Md-83's have similar range, weight, passenger capacity, and are a lot cheaper than A320's were. I realise the fuel costs are a little greater, and A320's are a little wider, but enough to make a difference?
Goboeing From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 2679 posts, RR: 14
Reply 2, posted (9 years 5 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6618 times:
I'm not an expert on either aircraft, but an MD-80 cannot go from JFK to LGB or wherever else on the west coast they fly to from there and IAD. I'm sure that is just one of many reasons that the newer A-320 series was selected.
LegendDC9 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (9 years 5 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 6593 times:
Some MD's do have the range (Alaska's long range MD's that flew to Russia) but overall it is an old and outdated design, small bins, small lavs, difficult to upgrade to the personal TV screens and nothing at all like what B6 wanted to get into. Plus, you can't beat Airbus lease rates...
Deltaflyertoo From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 1637 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (9 years 5 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 6592 times:
To add to what Goboeing and Phatfarmlines said, indeed the MD-80 has been out of production for awhile and definetly does not have the range to do transcons. The plane was designed to do short hops and compete with the 737 classics.
LegendDC9 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (9 years 5 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 6478 times:
They are somewhat cheaper to operate because:
A) They are Old and larger airlines want to get rid of them and have someone take over the leases.
B) With the hugh DC9 MD80 family slowly being retired, there are many certified pilots available to hire.
But they are not passenger friendly at all, but when you have LCC's trying to cut any cost to keep their structure cheap, what do they care about passenger comforts?
N1120a From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26196 posts, RR: 76
Reply 9, posted (9 years 5 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 6286 times:
>This isn't a slam towards B6 at all (hence my username)-but why do you think they decided to go with the A320 instead of MD-80 series. Md-83's have similar range, weight, passenger capacity, and are a lot cheaper than A320's were. I realise the fuel costs are a little greater, and A320's are a little wider, but enough to make a difference?<
As has been stated, the A320 was available new, and B6 did not want a single used plane.
Also, the range is not similar at all. The A320 can do trans-cons, the MD-83 can make it about 2000 miles before crapping out.
The MD-83, however, is actually lighter than the A320 and 737 and uses less fuel, that is one of the reasons it was attractive to airlines. Also, they carry less cargo, and that is an issue for some carriers.
>Some MD's do have the range (Alaska's long range MD's that flew to Russia)<
ANC-GDX (Magadan, Russia), which was the first leg on their Russian Far East flights, is only 1698 nm, which is in the range of the MD-83 and not close to the length of US trans-cons
>but overall it is an old and outdated design<
Not really, considering you they can easily be had with glass cockpits and newer software. Hell, the MD-90 has versions of A320 engines on them.
> small bins, small lavs, <
Considering the 717, which is related to the MD-80, can take Boeing's Big Bins, so can the MD-80 be readily converted. As far as lavs go, all airplane lavs are small
>difficult to upgrade to the personal TV screens<
No, they should be as easy as anything to upgrade, it is just a matter of the airlines that fly them not doing it. If B6 can put screens in the E190, they can put them on the MD-83.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
Tavong From Colombia, joined Jul 2001, 834 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (9 years 5 months 8 hours ago) and read 5952 times:
Well in fact the main problem has stated bofre is that B6 want's NEW equipment, otherwise the MD-80 derivatives (mopdernized) would be a good choice, the fact is that at this time MD-80s altougth still great planes can't face with the level of planes that the A32X/737NG derivatives in range, and passenger confort (it's by far more economic to add confort to and A32X-737NG than in an MD-80) , maybe of the MD-90 where still arroud it would be a good choice if it could be developed has a family like MD-80 was but it's an IF, the cheap leasing fares of the MD-80s makes them some kind of atractive proposal for starting airlines but not if yo're speaking about the B6 model.
Colombian coffee, the best...take a cup and you will see how delicious it is.