John From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 1374 posts, RR: 5 Posted (10 years 12 months 23 hours ago) and read 8500 times:
In my opinion, probably so. Boeing didn't show a whole lot of confidence in this airplane by failing to agressively market a family of 717s by offering a "lite" shortened version 717-100 to compete with the RJs or a stretch -300 version with longer range.
DAYflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3807 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted (10 years 12 months 23 hours ago) and read 8461 times:
No commonality with anything was also a large factor. That plus the outrageous rates for leasing it to TWA caused AA to turn away from an aircraft they may very well have otherwise ordered. Instead they dropped the F-100 and never replaced it. What I have always wondered is if they could have developed a "737-light" instead; 717 body and 737 cockpit and engines.
Alberchico From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3053 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (10 years 12 months 23 hours ago) and read 8448 times:
the 717 market was evaporated a long time ago. Thats why the fokker 70 and 100 ceased production. Dornier was also planning to build a jet of the Embraer 190 size the Dornier 728 if I'm not mistaken. Also the russians are comtemplating on whether to proceed with their Russian Regional Jet programme.
short summary of every jewish holiday: they tried to kill us ,we won , lets eat !
Iowa744fan From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 931 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (10 years 12 months 23 hours ago) and read 8433 times:
I would say that Boeing's decision to not push a family of 717s was more a result of their not wanting the larger models to compete with the 737. I agree with you in that I believe that Boeing should have really pushed this aircraft and the family, regardless of some competition with the 737. However, that is just my opinion.
Moman From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 1054 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (10 years 12 months 23 hours ago) and read 8416 times:
I am also saddened that Boeing is stopping production of the last DC-9 derivative.
I agree with you in that I believe that Boeing should have really pushed this aircraft and the family, regardless of some competition with the 737
Agree as well. Anyone who disagrees only needs to study marketing. All companies make products that mainly complement each other but also compete in a way. The Ford Explorer and Ford Excursion are good examples. They both do the same thing, go the same places, and can seat almost the same amount of people. Some want the smaller car, and some want the larger.
AA could use the 717 on high density routes (ORD-STL) or even STL-DFW and use the MD-80 series jets for the longer flights.
Too bad AA won't buy them. I think they would fit in very nicely.
Boeing, by not keeping the 717 series has eliminated a model, and hence will drive customers of that model to either bigger planes which they may not want or need, or to a competitor who offers a better deal (A319).
Ken4556 From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 172 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (10 years 12 months 21 hours ago) and read 8307 times:
I firmly believe that, because the 717 had its hertiage as a DC9, the Pilot Unions would never let the Express Carrier's pilots fly it. But since the E-jets are new, they have (or at least they think they do) a better chance to be able to bargin with the pilots union to have the lower priced pilots fly the planes under the express banners.
Boeing could not do anything about this or be responsible for this no matter how good the economics of the 717 are.
DfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1138 posts, RR: 51
Reply 8, posted (10 years 12 months 21 hours ago) and read 8236 times:
In my opinion, probably so. Boeing didn't show a whole lot of confidence in this airplane
McDonnel Dogulas, the (initial) contractor of the MD-95 bragged that the whole program cost no more than $300 million dollars. It was the same DC-9-30 wing that the NW DC-9s use today... it was an obsolete airframe jazzed up with new engines and avionics. Hardly Boeing's fault that it failed...
LV From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 2020 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (10 years 12 months 20 hours ago) and read 8207 times:
What killed the Boeing 717 was Boeing... plan and simple. Boeing is the biggest factor in the 717's demise. The 717 was just the red headed step child Boeing was stuck with in order to marry McDonnel Douglas.....and now its so sick of taking care of what it didn't want it sent it to live with its other parent and will clean out and maybe sell its room (Long Beach assembly)
ODwyerPW From Mexico, joined Dec 2004, 1041 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (10 years 12 months 20 hours ago) and read 8144 times:
The FD 728 & 928 were killed off. As was the Avro RJX program. Bombardier's own C-Series program has been shelved time and time again. A318 and B736 haven's told too many copies either. RRJ (Russian Regional Jet) hasn't made much progress. Haven't seen much about the AVIC II RJ(I forget it's model designation. or is it AVIC I...I know one of them is jointly building E145 planes, and the other is building a RJ from scrach with fuselage mounted engines). No surprise the 717 is gone.
Elwood64151 From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 2477 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (10 years 12 months 20 hours ago) and read 8129 times:
it was an obsolete airframe jazzed up with new engines and avionics. Hardly Boeing's fault that it failed...
The DC-9 wing is, today, still one of the most advanced wing designs in commercial aviation. They simply couldn't make it any better. The only reason they redesigned it for the MD-80 was that the wings were too small to provide enough lift.
By the same token, the 737NG is nothing more than a jazzed-up 737-200. Granted the wings are new, but the basic body and frame are the same. The 737NGs have done quite well, thank you.
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it in summer school.
Xkorpyoh From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 823 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (10 years 12 months 20 hours ago) and read 8085 times:
bombardier C-series shelved? since when? I think they are still working on that...no?
.. in that note.. why is bombardier getting into this market with a plane that offers hardly any innovation? it will be just another F-100. I just read in "flight international" that they dont want to get into the all composite fuselage, like the 787, because "Boeing doesnt know what they dont know about composites and bombardier doesnt want to experiment and be first". .. so, then why not wait until the 787 comes and see what happens with the composite fuselage?!?... then they will be able to truly offer a new innovative product for a lighter plane for the 100seat market. right?
DfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1138 posts, RR: 51
Reply 13, posted (10 years 12 months 20 hours ago) and read 8083 times:
By the same token, the 737NG is nothing more than a jazzed-up 737-200. Granted the wings are new, but the basic body and frame are the same.
That is a completly false anaology.
The DC-9 wing is, today, still one of the most advanced wing designs in commercial aviation. They simply couldn't make it any better.
It's was also completly unsuited for today's market needs.
I really don't mean to emply that old = bad, because the Concorde and 747 wings are, likewise, some of the best in existence. But in terms of OEW, payload, and range... the 717 structure missed the mark and was unable to scale adequetly.
What killed the Boeing 717 was Boeing... plan and simple. Boeing is the biggest factor in the 717's demise.
The MD-95 was quite dead on the vine when Boeing got hold of it... I'd actually attribute it's life until now to Boeing.
Midway2airtran From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 864 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (10 years 12 months 20 hours ago) and read 8076 times:
Timing and perceptions of the B717 cause it to be unsuccessful. Also, nobody seemed to want anything in that market as ODwyerPW said earlier.
The ERJ series is considered part of the Regional jet market which covers anything up to 100 seats. I doubt it took a bite into any part of the B717 market directly, its a entirely different aircraft for different needs.
Mrocktor From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 1706 posts, RR: 47
Reply 15, posted (10 years 12 months 18 hours ago) and read 7972 times:
"The ERJ series is considered part of the Regional jet market which covers anything up to 100 seats. I doubt it took a bite into any part of the B717 market directly, its a entirely different aircraft for different needs."
We are not talking about the ERJ series, we are talking about the E170/E190 series. If that is what you meant, then you are absolutely wrong. The 190/195 are a very direct competitor to the 717. Hell, they compete with the A318 and 736 - if you think they don't then ask youself: had jetBlue not chosen the E190, what plane would they be flying?
CORULEZ05 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (10 years 12 months 18 hours ago) and read 7958 times:
of course the E170-190 took away business from B717.....it is new and improved technology.....a new aircraft with much better everything.....although I think the B717 was already done even before the E's came around...
Lightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 15198 posts, RR: 100
Reply 18, posted (10 years 12 months 17 hours ago) and read 7931 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
While I really like the Ejets, I'm not seeing an order lost to Embraer that would have gone to the 717. B6? No. AC? Ok, a maybe. The E170 orders? Nope, those have been stealing from the Bombardier 700. Long term, it probably killed Boeing's hopes, but no real sales (yet).
I join the opinion of others that the 717 would have been a success if Boeing was willing to let it compete with the 737. FL should have been allowed to buy a long range 712. The rumor mill suggests WN would like more 73G's but production constraints have gotten in the way. In my opinion, Boeing will be needing the 717 production space as the market recovers and 737 orders flow in.
Oh, the rumor mill is that the C-series will be launched at the Paris air show. I'm giving it a 50/50 chance.
HA! My drone is lighter than required for registration.
ODwyerPW From Mexico, joined Dec 2004, 1041 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (10 years 12 months 13 hours ago) and read 7789 times:
regarding the C-Series being shelved... a better word would have been tabled, as I was implying that the idea is periodically revived, then set aside, then revived. Never implied that it was ever cancelled.
MD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8526 posts, RR: 11
Reply 20, posted (10 years 12 months 8 hours ago) and read 7715 times:
Well, according to Boeing, it did have better economics its competitors, the A318 and 736. Unfortunately for the 717, it was never stretched as a 713, and thus it couldn't match the economics of the -700.
Just about any suggestions coming from Long Beach to Seattle (Chicago) regarding enhancements in range or competitive financing were all but ignored by Boeing. Sure Boeing offered the -300 and businessjet versions but these derivatives were never pushed like other Boeing aircraft. Additionally when a customer would approach Boeing about the MD-95 (717), the sales team basically said yes the MD-95 is a great airplane and would work for your operation, but look at the 737NG too, it may work a bit better in your business plan.
I'll miss seeing and photographing Douglas Commercial airliners coming off the production line in Long Beach, another piece of aviation history gone. At least we still have the C-17A Globemaster III, which now becomes the last of the Douglas line and the last true connection to the great Donald Douglas.
AvObserver From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 2481 posts, RR: 8
Reply 22, posted (10 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 6979 times:
"In my opinion, Boeing will be needing the 717 production space as the market recovers and 737 orders flow in."
They won't be needing THAT space; it's probably being sold for real estate development as we speak. The Renton, WA site can more than handle any projected upturn in 737 output, particularly with the demise of the 757. As nice and sturdy a little workhorse as the 717 is, I agree it's overshadowed by the EMB-190/195 series, a thoroughly modern design. Despite the improvements over the earlier DC/MD series jets and being well suited for the routes it's used for, the 717 is dated compared to the large Embraer line, its most direct competitor; the Embraer's more efficient wing alone says a lot. Add a currently stagnant market for this size class and lack of commonality with BCA's other single-aisle product, the 737, along with failed attempts to further develop the line and it's clear the 717 had too many cards stacked against it.
"McD killed the MD-11 when they designed a plane which did not match its contemporaries economics."
The early MD-11 fuel-burn and range shortfalls were a blow this ultimately magnificent airliner never recovered from. Despite that McDonnell-Douglas corrected these design and engineering flaws, partly by cracking the whip on the engine maker, and got the MD-11 to EXCEED its promised performance, the embarassment and orders cancelled due to the early problems remained a blight on its otherwise good service history, aside from a number of losses.
D950 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 493 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 6778 times:
I believe Dacman hits the nail square on the head, SAS just went looking for 10 more MD90's (which Boeing also killed) and if there were a 717-3 or 400 they could have offered that in lieu of them not only not finding any 90's, but dumping the ones they have to Nordic Leisure and HELLO. Joe Leonard summed it up perfectly, he asked (pleaded) Boeing to make a 717-3 and they pointed to the 73NG, see ya!!
Resting on your laurels is a synonym for flirting with disaster
: SAS are getting rid of all their remaining MD90s. They will be gone from the fleet in October 2005. They still have -82 -83 -87s. Dont think theyre l
: SAS is getting rid of the 90's because they couldn't find any more with the config they were looking for, they have absolutely no problem with them. T
: I recently read through a back-issue (Feb. 2000) of Airways magazine that covered FL's launch of the 717. The very first sentence of the article basic
: Boeing killed the 717 when they developed and sold the 737-600 to SAS. The loss of the SAS order was the worst nightmare come true for MDDouglas.
: What killed it??? 3 - 100 seat 717 flights per day to a city, or 6 - 50 seat RJ flights per day to a city, with incremental growth just now scratching
: The MD-95 programme was dead in the water before the ink dried on the Boeing merger. The same can be said about the rest of the MDC aircraft lines. Wi
: Perhaps the 100-seat aircraft market isn't as lucrative as "everyone" claims it is, anymore. With many airports completedly crammed to capacity, many
: "It was the same DC-9-30 wing that the NW DC-9s use today" Isn't it also the same wing that the 1Time, Airborne Express, USA Navy, AeroCalifornia, Ceb
: but Midwest uses 717's on their signature service
: Yes, but is YX willing and/or able to place additional orders?