Flynavy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (3 years 7 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 677 times:
Why did it "fail" here in the states? It would seem they only had an average life span with US and AA for about 10 years. What contributed to its demise with the two carriers? Was it relatively fuel-inefficient, or did the rise of the CRJ/ERJ put it to pasture?
Srbmod From United States, joined Mar 2001, 14262 posts, RR: 62 Reply 1, posted (3 years 7 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 649 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
The demise of Fokker also played a role as well. At US Airways, it was decided to rationalize the number of fleet types during the renewal, so a/c like the F100, the DC-9, and the MD-80 (and the 732 once Metrojet was shuttered) were shown the door when they were. AA retired them due to the rising costs of maintaining their fleet, as they were having to scavenge or even fabricate parts. Plus they were an oddball in their fleet. In retrospect, not having an a/c in the 100-seat range was a mistake for AA. The returned the TW 717s to Boeing due to the high lease rates that they couldn't get reduced to a workable rate (The brass @ AA were impressed with the 717).
Sponsor Message: 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From United States, joined Mar 2001, 14262 posts, 
From Ireland, joined Oct 2000, 762 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Mar 2004, 2374 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
