Bedge88 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (13 years 2 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2554 times:
I would just like to know,
When the MD-90 came out Delta was the main customer that was asking for all the different improvements. But when they recieved it they were originally going to take a large number of md-90's.
But they ended up with about 16 aircraft.
Exusair From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 684 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (13 years 2 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2438 times:
These aircraft were originally going to replace the 727's, Delta had an order for over 100 of the MD-90 type. The inital aircraft brought into the fleet performed so miserably that cancellations were a frequent occurence. The were many problems with the software that interacted with the engine controls. It was built and designed on the cheap. There is extensive wear and tear on the aircraft in the fleet and they are only a few years old, specifically with the aircraft systems. It is a junky plane and it very well cost McDonnell it's future.
Dutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 58 Reply 3, posted (13 years 2 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2415 times:
The timing of the MD-90 was also difficult; the takeover of MD by Boeing was already in the works and the 737NG models were well into development when the MD90s first became availible. I believe that DL swapped the balance of its MD90 orders for B737-800 aircraft since it was clear that the new versions of the 737 would be the aircraft to survive the merger. As DL is a very big Boeing customer, I am sure that Boeing influenced DL's decision and they settled on the 737-800 fleet to replace the 727-200s. It is likely that the 15 or 16 MD-90s in DL's fleet will be traded back to Boeing at some point so that DL can cut costs - its expensive for an airline such as DL to keep such a limited number of MD-90s when either 737-800s or MD-88s can fly the route that the MD-90s are operating.
CAETravlr From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 907 posts, RR: 1 Reply 6, posted (13 years 2 months 1 day ago) and read 2315 times:
I know that the MD series aircraft will be around for a while in Delta's fleet, but I do look forward to the day when I leave CAE, not on an MD88, but a 737NG, and when landing in ATL, see Boeing aircraft in DL colors as far as the eye can see. The MD88s are not particularly bad to fly on, I just have never been a fan of their external appearance, I love watching the Boeing aircraft. It would make sense for them to phase out the MD90s fairly soon, since it is probably costly to maintain parts and crew for such a small number of aircraft in their fleet. Just my opinion.
A woman drove me to drink and I didn't have the decency to thank her. - W.C. Fields
Delta737 From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 516 posts, RR: 11 Reply 9, posted (13 years 2 months 23 hours ago) and read 2286 times:
How did you know that I was lurking this thread?
Actually all of us boys in DFW, where we fly both the -88's and 90's LOVE the MD-90. In a lot of ways, it makes the -88 seem like a C-150.
It's actually a much better plane than the -88 in many many ways, especially the FADEC system and APU. Sorry Acvitale, I didn't mean to blatantly disagree but the -90 is a fantastic airplane.
The -90 got a lot of things right that MD didn't inititally get right on the -88 in terms of automation, engines and the IFE systems but there were two problems in the design of the MD-90.
1. Delta - Management wanted a plane that was far superior to the -88 but similar enough to be integrated within the -88 fleet. Talk about the adage of trying to stuff 10 lbs of sand into a 5 lbs bag. Plus, we tried to treat the MD-88 as a DC-90-30 with EFIS both training-wise and maintenance-wise which didn't (and doesn't) work. With the -90, they treated it just like an EFIS DC-9-30 with an IAE V2500 engine retrofit. Baaaaad.
2. McDonnell Douglas - So eager to build a new airplane with no resources to correct the primary thing wrong with the MD-88. *the wing*. Often we have to fly the -90 at 255 KIAS below 10,000 feet because of the exteme lengths of the fuselage with a basic DC-9 wing. Rumor has it that the wing is straight off of a DC-9 (not the -10 of course) and MD didn't have the resources to redesign the wing to properly support the -88 and especially the larger -90.
MD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8475 posts, RR: 13 Reply 10, posted (13 years 2 months 21 hours ago) and read 2262 times:
That's the thing that really strikes me about the MD-80/MD-90: the wing looks like it's straight from the Sixties, which it is! Even the MD-11 had an upgraded wing, not a stretched DC-10 wing bolted on. It just doesn't look like it is very efficient. The 737NG does have a better wing, I can concede that much. Then again, so does the 717 (due to Boeing's financial resources).
ACVITALE From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 921 posts, RR: 11 Reply 11, posted (13 years 2 months 10 hours ago) and read 2217 times:
While I may agree that when it works the MD90 is a fantastic plane my issues with it are operational reliability numbers in the mid 90 percentile. While aircraft like the MD81/82/83/87/88 average in the 98-99 percentile. Biggest write ups on the 90s are the APU and the FADEC. Hence although when working they are great, They are also often the cause for problems that result in flight cancellations.
The MD90 is looked at from two different views within an airline. 1. Management - Generally looking at costs 2. Pilots - Generally looking at performance. Of course there is always the third group the passengers but, anyone in airline management will tell you the ugly truth if they thought they could get away with flying sardine cans and make money then damn be the passengers and let's make some cash. (not necessarily a bad thing)
My issue is clarified with a few examples...
1. Look at the ATR-42/72 a plane which is underpowered and not really loved by pilots... But, CASM is very low hence it is popular.
2. How about the L1011, Pilots loved it. Costs too much to continue to operate and maintain...
I know could have had better examples but, What can I say early AM here..
Of course there are the F100s the plane everyone loves to hate.
BTW The MD90 wing is different from the DC-9s it is however very similar to the MD82/83 wing...
Yes it has limitations to avoid coffin corner as was apptly demonstrated by the Spirit Pilot in the MD80 within the last 6 month who kept stalling the plane at FL280 or something close.
Woodsboy From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 1023 posts, RR: 3 Reply 12, posted (13 years 2 months 4 hours ago) and read 2185 times:
Delta plans to retire the MD-90 fleet in the next 6-9 years so they have a few years left. They took delivery of the -90s up to 1998, even after the Boeing MD takeover. I suspect that there was no incintive to buy more since Boeing wished to cancel the entire -90 program ASAP so that the 737NGs would have no competition. I have not heard of the MD-90 being a poor performer in the DL fleet.
The MD-11 suffered the same fate although the Delta annual report states that only the leased MD-11s will be phased out from 2006-09 and the owned ones will remain in the fleet. That will give the MD-11s up to 15 years before they are all gone, maybe more.
Anyone who says that Delta isnt happy with the performance of the needs to look and see that their MD-11s have a fantastic range equal to that of the 777-200 as well as more underfloor cargo capacity and....there are more of them!
MD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8475 posts, RR: 13 Reply 13, posted (13 years 2 months 3 hours ago) and read 2169 times:
Subsidizing pax operations with cargo generates substantial revenue. If the MD-11 can carry more belly cargo than the 777 can (and while I have no figures, just based on looks I bet it can), it'll remain a valuable aircraft in Delta's fleet.
Woodsboy From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 1023 posts, RR: 3 Reply 14, posted (13 years 2 months 3 hours ago) and read 2160 times:
The MD-11 has the most belly cargo capacity of any widebody, even a 747. The way the fuselage of the 747 slopes up toward the tail makes the belly unable to fit cargo containers any farther back then just aft of the trailing edge of the wing. The aft compartments are just for bulk cargo, mail and crew bags. This is partly why Lufthansa chose the MD-11 in addition to its economical operating costs, range and more reasonable capacity for the routes on which it will fly.
It certainly makes sense to augment passenger revenue with cargo revenue, often thats what pays the bills since cargo doesnt travel on frequent flyer tickets.