Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
ATA To Get DC-10's-RUMOR  
User currently offlineATA767 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 419 posts, RR: 1
Posted (8 years 1 week 5 days ago) and read 10031 times:

ATA to get DC-10's (maybe ex NW 30's). I am not sure that is so smart but I guess those 763's are not easy to come by.

[Edited 2006-04-06 01:45:51]

42 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineFlagshipAZ From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 3419 posts, RR: 14
Reply 1, posted (8 years 1 week 5 days ago) and read 9993 times:

Just a rumor, that's all. if anything ATA wants a 5th Dash 500 Tristar to replace its sole Dash 100 Tristar. No DC-10s again, and the 763...like you said, hard to come by. Regards.


"Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." --Ben Franklin
User currently offlineFlyDreamliner From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2759 posts, RR: 15
Reply 2, posted (8 years 1 week 5 days ago) and read 9926 times:

Give the 763's another 5 years, I think the market will start to see them get more available, as AC and Qantas start replacing their fleets with 787 and USAir replaces theirs with A350s.

I don't see why they'd buy a DC-10. One model of obsolete tri-jet is enough, don't you think. They've got tristar, I'm not sure why they'd want DC-10 too....



"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
User currently offline474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9
Reply 3, posted (8 years 1 week 5 days ago) and read 9914 times:

Quoting FlagshipAZ (Reply 1):
Just a rumor, that's all. if anything ATA wants a 5th Dash 500 Tristar to replace its sole Dash 100 Tristar.

TZ already has a 5th L-1011-500, N160AT s/n 1217, an ex-RJ is in storage (I think in Roswell).


User currently offlineMD90fan From Bahamas, joined Jul 2005, 2931 posts, RR: 7
Reply 4, posted (8 years 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 9837 times:

Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 2):
USAir replaces theirs with A350s.

Not to be a smart ass but out of the 767 family US only operates 762's (and A333)  Smile



http://www.devanwells.blogspot.com/
User currently offlineOptionsCLE From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (8 years 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 9767 times:

I'd like to hear an opinion from someone who knows more on this topic than I do, but I don't see this as a very good move. First of all, would ATA be buying or leasing these aircraft? I just can't grasp the financial justification for paying lease rates for maintinence intensive, inefficient aircraft. This is especially true in the climate of today's oil market. Anyone care to comment?

User currently offlineVortex From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 99 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (8 years 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 9653 times:

Denison confirmed they were in talks with NW regarding 10 DC-10s. They would replace the L-10s and add some more birds. All for the military.

User currently offlineLTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 12877 posts, RR: 12
Reply 7, posted (8 years 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 9523 times:

I love it that ATA seems to be the home of the 3-holers. I am quite sure those NW DC-10 have a lot of hours (and cycles), but were well mainatined and still would have a lot of life. Would they be retained as pax only or split with some going to freight conversions? Also, would there be a few other interested in those NW DC-10's as freighters (FedEx, UPS, others?)

User currently offlineFXramper From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 7126 posts, RR: 87
Reply 8, posted (8 years 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 9502 times:

Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 7):
would there be a few other interested in those NW DC-10's as freighters (FedEx, UPS, others?)

Heck yeah, were are gonna fight for them!  box 


User currently offlineB757capt From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 1336 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (8 years 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 9378 times:

What would this do to the training for the whole airline, ground crews, pilots, the SOP.. This could be a costly move and last time I checked ATA didn't have a lot of money.


The views written by this user are in no manner the views of my employer and should not be thought as such.
User currently offlineMajorNelson From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (8 years 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 9365 times:

Interesting decision. Maybe the DC10s are for that new blockbuster LGA-HOU route since it's already doing so well.

Someone in another related thread said that all the idiotic decision makers had left the airline. Hmmmm...

Maybe someone should tell the new brains of ATA that they already had DC10s before. And one burned up at ORD - bad omen, maybe.


User currently offline474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9
Reply 11, posted (8 years 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 9327 times:

Quoting MajorNelson (Reply 10):
Maybe someone should tell the new brains of ATA that they already had DC10s before. And one burned up at ORD - bad omen, maybe.

They only had one (1) DC-10 and it burned. With the insurance settlement they bought their first L-1011. I can't see them getting rid of the L-1011's after they just ran them through C-Checks at Gamco, but airlines are not known for doing things that make sense.


User currently offlineWesternA318 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 5647 posts, RR: 24
Reply 12, posted (8 years 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 9202 times:

Quoting Vortex (Reply 6):
Denison confirmed they were in talks with NW regarding 10 DC-10s.

10 of them? *whistle* Well, the good thing is, like WjCandee said, lower costs due to more available spares, MX lines, and whatnot out there.

Quoting MajorNelson (Reply 10):
And one burned up at ORD - bad omen, maybe.

LOL, that was their only DC-10, and it was becasue a cleaner left something on in the cabin?



Next trip: SLC-LAX-JFK-LAX-SLC on AA, gotta say goodbye to my beloved 762!
User currently offlineMax Q From United States of America, joined May 2001, 4057 posts, RR: 19
Reply 13, posted (8 years 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 9175 times:

Good luck to ATA with a practical decision.


The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
User currently offlineNYCTZ From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 49 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (8 years 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 9071 times:

Actually I believe we had 2 DC-10s. A DC-10-10, and a DC-10-40. From what I've been told the fire started in the cargo pit.

User currently offlineBlsbls99 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 345 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (8 years 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 9026 times:

If ATA goes through with the DC-10 deal, could they convert them into MD-10s? Is that conversion still available? And if so, would it be favorable financially?


319 320 313 722 732 733 735 73G 738 739 742 752 763 772 CRJ D9S ERJ EMB L10 M88 M90 SF3 AT4
User currently offlineJetjack74 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 7384 posts, RR: 51
Reply 16, posted (8 years 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 8964 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting NYCTZ (Reply 16):
Actually I believe we had 2 DC-10s. A DC-10-10, and a DC-10-40. From what I've been told the fire started in the cargo pit

The DC10-40 was written off at ORD in 1982 when it caught fire during an overnight maintnence check



Made from jets!
User currently offlineTjwgrr From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2379 posts, RR: 3
Reply 17, posted (8 years 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 8788 times:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Dave Campbell
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Dave Campbell




Direct KNOBS, maintain 2700' until established on the localizer, cleared ILS runway 26 left approach.
User currently offline474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9
Reply 18, posted (8 years 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 8705 times:

Quoting NYCTZ (Reply 16):
From what I've been told the fire started in the cargo pit.

Oxygen generator went off in a spare seat in the cargo compartment.


User currently offlineWarreng24 From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 705 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (8 years 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 6180 times:

What about all those L1011-250's that DL has sitting around?

I know they lack the range of the Dash 500's, but wouldn't it be nicer to have the fleet commonality?

Plus aren't some parts interchangable? I think both the Dash 500 and Dash 250 use the same RB211's?


User currently offlineSocal From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 473 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (8 years 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 6157 times:

How was this rumor started?
It would be good to see DC-10's in ATA livery



I Love HNL.............
User currently offlineDutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 57
Reply 21, posted (8 years 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 5365 times:

I just dont see ATA acquiring DC10s at this point in time - replacingone 30 year old type with another 30 year old type? I just does not make sense, especially when considering the 3 person cockpit and the very high price of fuel. The 763ER is the right aircraft for the ATA mission....I realize that good examples of the type are hard to come by on the second hand market at the moment, but there are possibilities in the coming years. So much depends on what happens at DL, GulfAir is looking at renewing its 763 fleet, etc etc.

Early on, ATA said what they would really prefer is RR powered 763ERs....meaning aircraft from BA or the BA birds now with Qantas (there is also a Chinese carrier with a few RR 763ERs)......with QF having signed up the 787, in the medium term future, their 763 fleet should become available, but is the timing something that ATA could live with?

I am surprised that ATA does not order new builds in connection with a leasing company.....Boeing is still happily accepting orders for the 767 (LAN ordered a good number last week) and the ATA charter/military business is a good one, regardless of the future of ATA's scheduled system, the charter/military biz will remain and produce good money to pay for leases for new aircraft.


User currently offlineWjcandee From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 4966 posts, RR: 18
Reply 22, posted (8 years 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 4676 times:

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 27):
I am surprised that ATA does not order new builds

This wouldn't be a reasonable thing to do given that aircraft dedicated to charter service generally have a substantially-lower utilization rate than do aircraft in scheduled service, making the capital cost issue very important. Those used 767 aircraft that they decided NOT to take would have cost them LESS in capital cost than new build aircraft that you mention.


User currently offlineChiGB1973 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 1612 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (8 years 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 4635 times:

Some Thoughts about Military Flying and DC-10's
From Doug Frankwich, MEC Safety & Health Chair

From the Editor: ATA has been looking at the possibility of leasing several DC-10's. Nothing has of yet been finalized.

Here are some thoughts from airliner.net chat page that make good points.

(1) As said, the 767-300 is the aircraft that ATA probably should want. It gets reimbursed at a higher per-mile rate than a DC10 or MD11. It has the right number of seats and good range. It's the same type rating as the 757-200 and 757-300, so the pilots just need differences training. It's reliable. Etc. It's also unavailable to ATA at a decent price, although NAO just picked up one more and has another coming later this year.

(2) The 767's will be coming available as the 787's come on line at certain carriers. However, if fuel prices stay up, they'll also be in demand as freighters. A 767-200 burns slightly less fuel than a 727, has one fewer engine and one fewer cockpit member than a 727, has an enormous amount more capacity, and thus makes a very desirable freighter if it can be had at an appropriate price. The freighter conversion demand will keep used 767's in demand for a long time.

(3) Omni presently does a very nice military business with DC10's. Reliability is likely an issue for them, but they get it done. So anybody who says that it's an inappropriate aircraft for military (which is what ATA wants to use it for) is really off base. Is it optimal? No. But it's also an airframe that is widely available, widely-known, has lots of parts available for it and places around the world that know how to maintain it. Is it superior in all these regards to the L1011? Heck, yes. (Is it a superior aircraft to the L1011? No. But, like the Betamax, the superior design can nevertheless, through atrophy, be simply impractical.)

(4) If ATA can run a decent military charter business using non-optimal 757-300's and challenging-to-keep-flying L1011's, the DC10's will be an improvement.

(5) The comment about the military paying for fuel isn't quite right. It's not an ACMI lease, where the client actually does pay for the fuel directly. In fact, if you run a more fuel-efficient aircraft than the next guy, you save money under the military system. You get paid a uniform rate based upon the class of aircraft. MD11, DC10, L1011 are all reimbursed at the same per-seat-mile rate, although they each are calculated to have a different fixed number of seats. The 767-300 and 767-200 are in the same class of aircraft for the military, and are reimbursed at a higher per-seat-mile rate than the DC10 class. What the military does give you a hedge against is an increase in the price of fuel. They recalculate on a regular basis what the average price per gallon is, and redo their per-seat-mile rate based upon that change in fuel price. So if fuel goes up, you will get a higher per-seat-mile payment, but it's the same whether you are using the more-fuel-efficient or less-fuel-efficient aircraft. So, your basic cost inputs are capital (lease) cost, crew cost, maintenance cost, and fuel cost. A 767 will have lower crew, maint and fuel cost, but a higher capital cost. A DC10 will have higher crew (one more), maint (another engine) and fuel cost, but a lower capital cost. Bottom line is that these aircraft have no significant demand outside of certain charter and some limited freight applications after NW removes them from service, so their capital cost may be way low, and that may help offset the higher other costs. Also, if you're looking at keeping them for 5 years or so, the low capital cost makes them desirable in that they don't cost you much money when they're sitting around waiting for business. The bad part, however, is that they have very limited demand in charter applications outside of military, so when the military doesn't need them they will likely be mostly sitting around.

So there you have it. Those are the factors that ATA faced, and rather than pass up the opportunity for additional military business, rather than face having to D-check two more L1011s in a year or so, rather than rely on a fleet of only 4 widebodies, they now will have a pool from which they can draw to reestablish themselves as a formidable military carrier. If they decide to go for it


User currently offlineWjcandee From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 4966 posts, RR: 18
Reply 24, posted (8 years 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 4607 times:

Quoting ChiGB1973 (Reply 33):
Here are some thoughts from airliner.net chat page that make good points.

Dang! How flattered am I?

Humbly,

Bill


25 Post contains links Wjcandee : Hey, for what it's worth, Omni's calculated cost per seat mile, flying the DC10, is the lowest of all carriers and types used in the large-aircraft co
26 747400F : If DC10's make good economic sense to fly on military contracts, and NW has some DC10's spare, why does NW not enter the military chartermarket with t
27 Post contains links Wjcandee : The military reimburses at a fixed rate per seat-mile, in like 3 categories of long-range aircraft type (large/medium/small). This rate is calculated
28 747400F : Thanks for good explanation!
29 Post contains images MX757 : Not bad for an "arm chair CEO". You hit the nail right on the head. Note: I would quote you some more but that would take up alot of bandwidth!
30 Post contains images Nitrohelper : thank you for an excellent reply
31 Malaysia : If they were on sale for 1$ to ATA, they might consider them.
32 Clipper002 : Bill, As usual, a great thread on AMC contracts. One thing I think you missed might be entitlement. Once ATA has used all of its' entitlement, they mu
33 Wjcandee : Thanks, Ed. Good point, of course. ATA couldn't just buy 10 aircraft and hope to use them. Here was what I was thinking: (1) as their business plan s
34 Bennett123 : How feasible would it be to uprate 22B engines to 524's or simply replace them with 524's.
35 Wjcandee : Apparently, among other things, this would require manufacturer cooperation and/or support, which it no longer provides. Assuming that any manufactur
36 Lijnden : I love the DC-10, but with most passenger airframes that are still flying having reached > 100000 hours / > 30000 cycles and with the last DC-10 build
37 Wjcandee : The MD11 is in high demand for freighter conversions. As a practical matter, a sufficient fleet of them won't be available to ATA at an appropriate p
38 Wjcandee : Hey, man, I gave you the link to the Department of Defense, which audited and adjusted the figures provided by the airlines before publishing them. N
39 Clipper002 : Bill, Quite a scenario. Seems a bit ambitious to me, but in the wacky world of aviation, "one never knows, now do one?" It'll be interesting to see ho
40 AndrewUber : Not if DL goes tits up next week. There will be quite an influx of aircraft on the market. I know for a fact a few carriers are hovering over DL like
41 Clipper002 : Andrew, Sorry, but that's not how it works when an airline in BK goes TU. Every possible transaction has to be approved by the courts. Each a/c has to
42 Wjcandee : Thanks for your nice words, too. I know that your son will have a wonderful career at CO. What you said about the Polar job certainly made it sound l
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
My Personal Tribout To The DC-10. posted Sat May 20 2006 20:39:39 by 747400sp
ATA To Get 747-200s? posted Sat May 21 2005 20:08:47 by ChiGB1973
Court Authorizes ATA To Get 767's posted Fri May 20 2005 19:14:24 by LN-MOW
Where To Find A DC-10 posted Sun Feb 6 2005 04:15:18 by PizzaPolli
What Happened To JO's DC-10-40 Fleet? posted Fri Dec 3 2004 01:43:00 by Ktachiya
AC To Lease DC-10 posted Tue Jul 13 2004 18:00:41 by RT514
Arrow Air To Get DC-10s And DC-8-70s posted Tue Apr 20 2004 06:33:51 by Airliner777
Biman Plans To Dump Dc-10's! posted Fri Nov 14 2003 15:48:27 by Mehtabrahman
Did Canadi>n Ever Look At MD11 To Replace DC-10? posted Fri Sep 12 2003 19:56:37 by Bmacleod
MyTravel To Scrap DC-10's posted Sun Sep 7 2003 20:24:59 by Worldoftui